Long-Term Follow-Up of Colonoscopy Quality Monitoring.

INTRODUCTION: High-quality colonoscopy is paramount for colorectal cancer prevention. Since 2009, endoscopists at our institution have received quarterly report cards summarizing individual colonoscopy quality indicators. We have previously shown that implementing this intervention was associated with short-term improvement in adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, the long-term effect of continued monitoring on colonoscopy quality is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of prospectively administered quarterly colonoscopy quality report cards at the Roudebush Veteran's Affairs Medical Center between April 1, 2012, and August 31, 2019. The anonymized reports included individual endoscopists' ADRs, cecal intubation rates, and withdrawal times. Analyses were performed to determine slopes over time for each quality metric by physician and assess for differences based on whether ADRs were calculated quarterly or yearly. RESULTS: Data from the report cards of 17 endoscopists who had performed 24,361 colonoscopies were included. The mean quarterly ADR (±SD) was 51.7% (±11.7%) and mean yearly ADR was 47.2% (±13.8%). There was a small increase in overall ADR based on quarterly and yearly measurements (slope + 0.6%, P = 0.02; and slope +2.7%, P < 0.001, respectively), but no significant change in individual ADRs, cecal intubation rates, or withdrawal times. Analysis of SD of ADRs showed no significant difference between yearly and quarterly measurements ( P = 0.064). Individual endoscopists' ADR SD differences between yearly and quarterly measurements ranged from -4.7% to +6.8%. DISCUSSION: Long-term colonoscopy quality monitoring paralleled stable improvements in overall ADR. For endoscopists with baseline high ADR, frequent monitoring and reporting of colonoscopy quality metrics may not be necessary.

Perspectives on Colon Cancer Screening-A Physician Panel Discussion for Preclinical Medical Students.

Introduction: Colon cancer is the third most common cancer in the US, and the survival rate improves drastically with early detection. It is important for medical students to understand screening options, and to be able to effectively discuss these options with their patients. While basic information about colon cancer screening is ubiquitous in US medical school curricula, no published curricula describe teaching students the nuances of negotiating this discussion with patients and tailoring screening to individual patients' needs. Methods: We developed a 90-minute session for second-year medical students as part of a gastroenterology and nutrition course. We provided a short lecture on colon cancer screening. We then had a panel of practicing gastroenterologists and a primary care physician discuss their approaches to six hypothetical cases. The students reflected in writing on what they learned from the session and on their opinions of the session format. Results: Of second-year medical students, 139 attended the session and 110 submitted written reflections on the session (79% response rate). The students perceived significant gains in knowledge, communication skills, and attitudes around the discussions. Discussion: This expert panel session taught medical students knowledge and communication skills related to colon cancer screening. The session could be easily implemented at any medical school, either at the preclinical or clinical level.

Does Increased Adenoma Detection Reduce the Risk of Colorectal Cancer, and How Good Do We Need to Be?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is largely preventable with colonoscopy and other screening modalities. However, the effectiveness of screening and surveillance depends on the quality of the colonoscopy exam. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the best-validated metric by which we measure individual physicians' performance. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent evidence suggests that ADR benchmarks may be inappropriately low. There is proof that improving ADR leads to significant reductions in post-colonoscopy CRC (PCCRC). Two studies have demonstrated that when a colonoscopy is performed by physicians with higher ADRs, patients are less likely to have advanced adenomas on surveillance and less likely to develop or die from PCCRC. Finally, there is at least some evidence that higher ADRs do not lead to more cumulative surveillance exams. The ADR is a useful outcome measure that can provide individual endoscopists and their patients with information about the likelihood of developing PCCRC. To achieve the lowest possible PCCRC rate, we should be striving for higher ADRs. While strategies and innovations may help a bit in improving ADRs, our efforts should focus on ensuring a complete mucosal exam for each patient. Behavioral psychology theories may provide useful frameworks for studying motivating factors that drive a careful exam.