Patient safety incidents in endoscopy: a human factors analysis of nonprocedural significant harm incidents from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS).

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in understanding and reducing the risk of endoscopic procedures, there is little consideration of the safety of the wider endoscopy service. Patient safety incidents (PSIs) still occur. We sought to identify nonprocedural PSIs (nPSIs) and their causative factors from a human factors perspective and generate ideas for safety improvement. METHODS: Endoscopy-specific PSI reports were extracted from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). A retrospective, cross-sectional human factors analysis of data was performed. Two independent researchers coded data using a hybrid thematic analysis approach. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) was used to code contributory factors. Analysis informed creation of driver diagrams and key recommendations for safety improvement in endoscopy. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2019, 1181 endoscopy-specific PSIs of significant harm were reported across England and Wales, with 539 (45.6%) being nPSIs. Five categories accounted for over 80% of all incidents, with "follow-up and surveillance" being the largest (23.4% of all nPSIs). From the free-text incident reports, 487 human factors codes were identified. Decision-based errors were the most common act prior to PSI occurrence. Other frequent preconditions to incidents were focused on environmental factors, particularly overwhelmed resources, patient factors, and ineffective team communication. Lack of staffing, standard operating procedures, effective systems, and clinical pathways were also contributory. Seven key recommendations for improving safety have been made in response to our findings. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first national-level human factors analysis of endoscopy-specific PSIs. This work will inform safety improvement strategies and should empower individual services to review their approach to safety.

Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy.

GI endoscopy is highly resource-intensive with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and waste generation. Sustainable endoscopy in the context of climate change is now the focus of mainstream discussions between endoscopy providers, units and professional societies. In addition to broader global challenges, there are some specific measures relevant to endoscopy units and their practices, which could significantly reduce environmental impact. Awareness of these issues and guidance on practical interventions to mitigate the carbon footprint of GI endoscopy are lacking. In this consensus, we discuss practical measures to reduce the impact of endoscopy on the environment applicable to endoscopy units and practitioners. Adoption of these measures will facilitate and promote new practices and the evolution of a more sustainable specialty.

Development of the "Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills" (TEAM-ENTS) behavioral marker system.

BACKGROUND: Non-technical skills (NTS) are integral to team performance and subsequent quality and safety of care. Behavioral marker systems (BMSs) are now increasingly used in healthcare to support the training and assessment of team NTS. Within gastrointestinal endoscopy, this is an area of novel research. The aims of this study were to define the core relevant NTS for endoscopy teams and develop a preliminary framework for a team-based BMS known as TEAM-ENTS (Teamwork in Endoscopy Assessment Module for Endoscopic Non-Technical Skills). METHODS: This study was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, a literature review of team-based BMSs was performed to inform an interview study of core endoscopy team members. Cognitive task analysis was used to break down the NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Framework analysis generated the structure for the preliminary TEAM-ENTS framework. In phase 2, a modified Delphi process was undertaken to refine the items of the framework. RESULTS: Seven consultant endoscopists and six nurses were interviewed. The final coding framework consisted of 88 codes grouped into five overarching categories. In total, 58 participants were recruited to the Delphi panel. In the first round, nine elements and 37 behavioral descriptors did not meet consensus. Following item adjustment, merging and deletion, all remaining items met consensus thresholds after the second round. The refined TEAM-ENTS BMS consists of five categories, 16 elements, and 47 behavioral descriptors. CONCLUSIONS: The refined TEAM-ENTS behavioral marker system was developed to reflect the core NTS relevant to endoscopy teams. Future studies will aim to fully validate this tool.

Evaluation of a real-time computer-aided polyp detection system during screening colonoscopy: AI-DETECT study.

BACKGROUND: Polyp detection and resection during colonoscopy significantly reduce long-term colorectal cancer risk. Computer-aided detection (CADe) may increase polyp identification but has undergone limited clinical evaluation. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of CADe at colonoscopy within a bowel cancer screening program (BCSP). METHODS: This prospective, randomized controlled trial involved all eight screening-accredited colonoscopists at an English National Health Service (NHS) BCSP center (February 2020 to December 2021). Patients were randomized to CADe or standard colonoscopy. Patients meeting NHS criteria for bowel cancer screening were included. The primary outcome of interest was polyp detection rate (PDR). RESULTS: 658 patients were invited and 44 were excluded. A total of 614 patients were randomized to CADe (n = 308) or standard colonoscopy (n = 306); 35 cases were excluded from the per-protocol analysis due to poor bowel preparation (n = 10), an incomplete procedure (n = 24), or a data issue (n = 1). Endocuff Vision was frequently used and evenly distributed (71.7 % CADe and 69.2 % standard). On intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, there was a borderline significant difference in PDR (85.7 % vs. 79.7 %; P = 0.05) but no significant difference in adenoma detection rate (ADR; 71.4 % vs. 65.0 %; P = 0.09) for CADe vs. standard groups, respectively. On per-protocol analysis, no significant difference was observed in these rates. There was no significant difference in procedure times. CONCLUSIONS: In high-performing colonoscopists in a BCSP who routinely used Endocuff Vision, CADe improved PDR but not ADR. CADe appeared to have limited benefit in a BCSP setting where procedures are performed by experienced colonoscopists.

Curriculum for training in endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard of care for the complete removal of large (≥ 10 mm) nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs). Increased detection of LNPCPs owing to screening colonoscopy, plus high observed rates of incomplete resection and need for surgery call for a standardized approach to training in EMR. 1 : Trainees in EMR should have achieved basic competence in diagnostic colonoscopy, < 10-mm polypectomy, pedunculated polypectomy, and common methods of gastrointestinal endoscopic hemostasis. The role of formal training courses is emphasized. Training may then commence in vivo under the direct supervision of a trainer. 2 : Endoscopy units training endoscopists in EMR should have specific processes in place to support and facilitate training. 3: A trained EMR practitioner should have mastered theoretical knowledge including how to assess an LNPCP for risk of submucosal invasion, how to interpret the potential difficulty of a particular EMR procedure, how to decide whether to remove a particular LNPCP en bloc or piecemeal, whether the risks of electrosurgical energy can be avoided for a particular LNPCP, the different devices required for EMR, management of adverse events, and interpretation of reports provided by histopathologists. 4: Trained EMR practitioners should be familiar with the patient consent process for EMR. 5: The development of endoscopic non-technical skills (ENTS) and team interaction are important for trainees in EMR. 6: Differences in recommended technique exist between EMR performed with and without electrosurgical energy. Common to both is a standardized technique based upon dynamic injection, controlled and precise snare placement, safety checks prior to the application of tissue transection (cold snare) or electrosurgical energy (hot snare), and interpretation of the post-EMR resection defect. 7: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to manage adverse events associated with EMR including intraprocedural bleeding and perforation, and post-procedural bleeding. Delayed perforation should be avoided by correct interpretation of the post-EMR defect and treatment of deep mural injury. 8: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to communicate EMR procedural findings to patients and provide them with a plan in case of adverse events after discharge and a follow-up plan. 9: A trained EMR practitioner must be able to detect and interrogate a post-endoscopic resection scar for residual or recurrent adenoma and apply treatment if necessary. 10: Prior to independent practice, a minimum of 30 EMR procedures should be performed, culminating in a trainer-guided assessment of competency using a validated assessment tool, taking account of procedural difficulty (e. g. using the SMSA polyp score). 11: Trained practitioners should log their key performance indicators (KPIs) of polypectomy during independent practice. A guide for target KPIs is provided in this document.

Multicentre derivation and validation of a colitis-associated colorectal cancer risk prediction web tool.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) diagnosed with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) have increased risk of developing advanced neoplasia (AN: high-grade dysplasia or colorectal cancer). We aimed to develop and validate a predictor of AN risk in patients with UC with LGD and create a visual web tool to effectively communicate the risk. DESIGN: In our retrospective multicentre validated cohort study, adult patients with UC with an index diagnosis of LGD, identified from four UK centres between 2001 and 2019, were followed until progression to AN. In the discovery cohort (n=246), a multivariate risk prediction model was derived from clinicopathological features using Cox regression. Validation used data from three external centres (n=198). The validated model was embedded in a web tool to calculate patient-specific risk. RESULTS: Four clinicopathological variables were significantly associated with AN progression in the discovery cohort: endoscopically visible LGD >1 cm (HR 2.7; 95% CI 1.2 to 5.9), unresectable or incomplete endoscopic resection (HR 3.4; 95% CI 1.6 to 7.4), moderate/severe histological inflammation within 5 years of LGD diagnosis (HR 3.1; 95% CI 1.5 to 6.7) and multifocality (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 6.2). In the validation cohort, this four-variable model accurately predicted future AN cases with overall calibration Observed/Expected=1.01 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.52), and achieved 100% specificity for the lowest risk group over 13 years of available follow-up. CONCLUSION: Multicohort validation confirms that patients with large, unresected, multifocal LGD and recent moderate/severe inflammation are at highest risk of developing AN. Personalised risk prediction provided via the Ulcerative Colitis-Cancer Risk Estimator ( www.UC-CaRE.uk ) can support treatment decision-making.

Novel classification for adverse events in GI endoscopy: the AGREE classification.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Standardized registration and evaluation of adverse events (AEs) are essential to assess the safety of endoscopic procedures. We propose a novel classification system, named adverse events in GI endoscopy (AGREE), adapted from a widely accepted surgical tool. METHODS: The Clavien-Dindo classification for surgical AEs was adapted for endoscopy. To validate the novel classification, we assessed if the severity of AEs, as perceived by 10 endoscopists, 10 endoscopy nurses, and 10 patients, corresponded with the severity grading used in the AGREE classification in 10 pairwise comparisons. We additionally assessed the correlation between the AGREE classification and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) classification. The acceptability of the AGREE classification was evaluated through an international questionnaire. RESULTS: The perception of endoscopists, endoscopy nurses, and patients corresponded with the severity grading of the AGREE classification in 80% of cases (238/299). The AGREE classification significantly correlated with the ASGE classification (ρ = .760). Fifty-seven of 84 experts (68%) completed a questionnaire regarding the acceptability of the AGREE classification. The experts consulted considered the AGREE classification as simple (86%), reproducible (98%), logical (98%), and useful (96%). Most case presentations (84%) were correctly graded according to the AGREE classification. CONCLUSIONS: The AGREE classification provides a standardized and reproducible approach to the assessment of AEs in diagnostic and therapeutic GI endoscopy. Broad implementation of the AGREE classification may facilitate the evaluation of AEs across different endoscopists, disciplines, endoscopy services, and regions. This standardization of AE reporting will support improved quality assurance in GI endoscopy.

Implementation of optical diagnosis with a "resect and discard" strategy in clinical practice: DISCARD3 study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Optical diagnosis (OD) of polyps can be performed with advanced endoscopic imaging. For high-confidence diagnoses, a "resect and discard" strategy could offer significant histopathology time and cost savings. The implementation threshold is a ≥90% OD-histology surveillance interval concordance. Here we assessed the OD learning curve and feasibility of a resect and discard strategy for ≤5-mm and <10-mm polyps in a bowel cancer screening setting. METHODS: In this prospective feasibility study, 8 bowel cancer screening endoscopists completed a validated OD training module and performed procedures. All <10-mm consecutive polyps had white-light and narrow-band images taken and were given high- or low-confidence diagnoses until 120 high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp diagnoses had been performed. All polyps had standard histology. High-confidence OD errors underwent root-cause analysis. Histology and OD-derived surveillance intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Of 565 invited patients, 525 patients were included. A total of 1560 <10-mm polyps underwent OD and were resected and retrieved (1329 ≤5 mm and 231 6-9 mm). There were no <10-mm polyp cancers. High-confidence OD was accurate in 81.5% of ≤5-mm and 92.8% of 6-9-mm polyps. Sensitivity for OD of a ≤5-mm adenoma was 93.0% with a positive predictive value of 90.8%. OD-histology surveillance interval concordance for ≤5-mm OD was 91.3% (209/229) for U.S. Multi-Society Task Force, 98.3% (225/229) for European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and 98.7% (226/229) for British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A resect and discard strategy for high-confidence ≤5-mm polyp OD in a group of bowel cancer screening colonoscopists is feasible and safe, with performance exceeding the 90% surveillance interval concordance required for implementation in clinical practice. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04710693.).

When and How To Use Endoscopic Tattooing in the Colon: An International Delphi Agreement.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is a lack of clinical studies to establish indications and methodology for tattooing, therefore technique and practice of tattooing is very variable. We aimed to establish a consensus on the indications and appropriate techniques for colonic tattoo through a modified Delphi process. METHODS: The baseline questionnaire was classified into 3 areas: where tattooing should not be used (1 domain, 6 questions), where tattooing should be used (4 domains, 20 questions), and how to perform tattooing (1 domain 20 questions). A total of 29 experts participated in the 3 rounds of the Delphi process. RESULTS: A total of 15 statements were approved. The statements that achieved the highest agreement were as follows: tattooing should always be used after endoscopic resection of a lesion with suspicion of submucosal invasion (agreement score, 4.59; degree of consensus, 97%). For a colorectal lesion that is left in situ but considered suitable for endoscopic resection, tattooing may be used if the lesion is considered difficult to detect at a subsequent endoscopy (agreement score, 4.62; degree of consensus, 100%). A tattoo should never be injected directly into or underneath a lesion that might be removed endoscopically at a later point in time (agreement score, 4.79; degree of consensus, 97%). Details of the tattoo injection should be stated clearly in the endoscopy report (agreement score, 4.76; degree of consensus, 100%). CONCLUSIONS: This expert consensus has developed different statements about where tattooing should not be used, when it should be used, and how that should be done.

Lower gastrointestinal polypectomy competencies in the United Kingdom: a retrospective analysis of Directly Observed Polypectomy Skills (DOPyS).

BACKGROUND: Polypectomy is often the most hazardous part of colonoscopy. There is significant variability in polypectomy training and assessment internationally. DOPyS (Directly Observed Polypectomy Skills) is a validated assessment tool and is used to demonstrate polypectomy competency in the UK. This study aimed to describe the learning curve for polypectomy competency in UK trainees. METHODS: Retrospective DOPyS data (January 2009 to September 2015) were obtained from the UK Joint Advisory Group (JAG) for intestinal endoscopy training system (JETS) national database. The number of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) procedures, overall cecal intubation rate (CIR), procedure intensity, and time in days to the first DOPyS assessment were recorded, and time to JAG certification was calculated. RESULTS: 4965 DOPyS assessments from 336 trainees were analyzed. Within the study period, 124 and 53 trainees achieved provisional and full colonoscopy certification, respectively. Trainees started formative assessment of polypectomy after > 130 LGI procedures and with a CIR of > 70 %. Within 3 years from the first DOPyS assessment, 94 % of trainees achieved provisional certification, and 50 % full certification. Higher procedure intensity at baseline DOPyS assessment was associated with a higher likelihood of obtaining certification sooner. CONCLUSION: There is a significant variation in time to competency, and this potentially reflects the time necessary to acquire polypectomy skills. There is a need to start polypectomy training earlier, once sufficient skills, such as tip control, have been achieved to shorten the time to competency. Overall, the CIR could be used as a guide for such technical skills. Increasing exposure to training lists also potentially reduces the time to polypectomy competency.

Management of inflammatory bowel disease associated colonic dysplasia: factors predictive of patient choice and satisfaction.

AIM: In cases of prognostic uncertainty and equipoise as to the best management (prophylactic colectomy vs. surveillance) for dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), individualized discussion with the patient is required. Further understanding of patients' preferences is needed. METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional survey was distributed to adult IBD patients who had never been diagnosed with dysplasia (dysplasia-naïve) and those who had (dysplasia-experienced). Risk perceptions and factors that influence management choices were explored. RESULTS: There were 123 respondents. A substantial proportion (29%) of the dysplasia-experienced respondents did not feel well informed about the associated cancer risk and/or its management by their clinical team. Contributing themes included contradictory advice and lack of personalized information regarding their cancer risk, alternative management options and impact on long-term quality of life. Decisional regret and health-related quality of life amongst those who chose either surveillance or surgery were comparable, but cancer-related worry scores were elevated in the surveillance group. The dysplasia-naïve respondents reported that they would only consider having a prophylactic colectomy if they had on average a 50% or even higher risk of developing cancer. On multivariable logistic regression analyses, predictors of colectomy or surveillance preference included ethnicity, personality traits such as health locus of control (whether health status is influenced by luck) and differences in perception of what a low risk of cancer is. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies predictive factors that can influence decision-making and satisfaction with the counselling process when IBD dysplasia is diagnosed. Further qualitative exploration of cultural themes would be informative.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines.

These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.

Teamworking in endoscopy: a human factors toolkit for the COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy services have had to rapidly adapt their working practices in response to COVID-19. As recovery of endoscopy services proceeds, our workforce faces numerous challenges that can impair effective teamworking. We designed and developed a novel toolkit to support teamworking in endoscopy during the pandemic. METHODS: A human factors model was developed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy teams. From this, we identified a set of key teamworking goals, which informed the development of a toolkit to support several team processes. The toolkit was refined following expert input and refinement over a 6-week period. RESULTS: The toolkit consists of four cognitive aids that can be used to support team huddles, briefings, and debriefs, alongside techniques to optimize endoscopic nontechnical skills across the patient-procedure pathway. We describe the processes that local endoscopy units can employ to implement this toolkit. CONCLUSION: A toolkit of cognitive aids, based on human factors principles, may be useful in supporting teams, helping them adapt to working safely in the era of COVID-19.

Cumulative burden of inflammation predicts colorectal neoplasia risk in ulcerative colitis: a large single-centre study.

OBJECTIVE: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a dynamic disease with its severity continuously changing over time. We hypothesised that the risk of colorectal neoplasia (CRN) in UC closely follows an actuarial accumulative inflammatory burden, which is inadequately represented by current risk stratification strategies. DESIGN: This was a retrospective single-centre study. Patients with extensive UC who were under colonoscopic surveillance between 2003 and 2012 were studied. Each surveillance episode was scored for a severity of microscopic inflammation (0=no activity; 1=mild; 2=moderate; 3=severe activity). The cumulative inflammatory burden (CIB) was defined as sum of: average score between each pair of surveillance episodes multiplied by the surveillance interval in years. Potential predictors were correlated with CRN outcome using time-dependent Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 987 patients were followed for a median of 13 years (IQR, 9-18), 97 (9.8%) of whom developed CRN. Multivariate analysis showed that the CIB was significantly associated with CRN development (HR, 2.1 per 10-unit increase in CIB (equivalent of 10, 5 or 3.3 years of continuous mild, moderate or severe active microscopic inflammation); 95% CI 1.4 to 3.0; P<0.001). Reflecting this, while inflammation severity based on the most recent colonoscopy alone was not significant (HR, 0.9 per-1-unit increase in severity; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.2; P=0.5), a mean severity score calculated from all colonoscopies performed in preceding 5 years was significantly associated with CRN risk (HR, 2.2 per-1-unit increase; 95% CI 1.6 to 3.1; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk of CRN in UC is significantly associated with accumulative inflammatory burden. An accurate CRN risk stratification should involve assessment of multiple surveillance episodes to take this into account.

Whole-colon investigation vs. flexible sigmoidoscopy for suspected colorectal cancer based on presenting symptoms and signs: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) usually undergo colonoscopy. Flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) may be preferred if proximal cancer risk is low. We investigated which patients could undergo FS alone. METHODS: Cohort study of 7375 patients (≥55 years) referred with suspected CRC to 21 English hospitals (2004-2007), followed using hospital records and cancer registries. We calculated yields and number of needed whole-colon examinations (NNE) to diagnose one cancer by symptoms/signs and subsite. We considered narrow (haemoglobin <11 g/dL men; <10 g/dL women) and broad (<13 g/dL men; <12 g/dL women) anaemia definitions and iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA). RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-seven proximal and 429 distal CRCs were diagnosed. A broad anaemia definition identified 80% of proximal cancers; a narrow definition with IDA identified 39%. In patients with broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, proximal cancer yield and NNE were 4.8% (97/2022) and 21. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency (41% of cohort), proximal cancer yield and NNE were 0.4% (13/3031) and 234. CONCLUSION: Most proximal cancers are accompanied by broad definition anaemia. In patients without broad definition anaemia and/or abdominal mass, with rectal bleeding or increased stool frequency, proximal cancer is rare and FS should suffice.

Impact of a new distal attachment on colonoscopy performance in an academic screening center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Distal attachments placed on the colonoscope tip may positively affect performance by assisting insertion and polyp detection. The original Endocuff (ARC Medical Design, Leeds, United Kingdom) appears to improve adenoma detection rate (ADR), but no data assess the performance of the second-generation Endocuff Vision. METHODS: A pilot service evaluation study (April 2013 to September 2014) was conducted on patients with positive fecal occult blood tests within the National Bowel Cancer Programme during 3 consecutive periods: precuff/no device used, during-cuff/device used, and postcuff/no device used. During the middle period the use of the Endocuff Vision by the 4 screening-accredited colonoscopists was discretional (nonrandomized design). Data were analyzed using pairwise comparisons during the 3 designated periods to examine key performance indicators: adenoma detection, procedural time, sedation requirements, and patient comfort. RESULTS: Four hundred ten complete colonoscopies were performed (137 precuff, 136 cuff, and 137 postcuff period). Overall, there was a notable increase in the mean ADR of 16% (P < .03) and in the mean number adenoma per procedure (MAP) of 83% (P = .007) from precuff to cuff period. The mean cecal intubation time was statistically lower during the cuff period (7 minutes) in relation to the precuff period (8 minutes; reduction of 12.5%, P = .002) and the postcuff period (9 minutes; increase of 28.6%, P = .002). The mean negative colonoscopy withdrawal time was also significantly lower during the cuff period (8 minutes, 30 seconds) when compared with the precuff (12 minutes) or postcuff period (9 minutes, 45 seconds; P ≤ .001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the use of the Endocuff Vision was not associated with sedation requirements or patient discomfort scores. No adverse events were reported from the use of the Endocuff Vision, although it was electively removed in 6 patients where severe sigmoid colon diverticulosis was encountered and 2 patients because of discomfort during anal insertion. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot service evaluation study, the use of the Endocuff Vision appears to be associated with an improvement in overall colonoscopy operator performance. We found increased ADR and MAP as well as decreased time for colonoscope insertion and withdrawal time with no increase in sedation requirements or patient discomfort.

The impact of chromoendoscopy for surveillance of the duodenum in patients with MUTYH-associated polyposis and familial adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Duodenal polyposis and cancer have become a key issue for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP). Almost all patients with FAP will develop duodenal adenomas, and 5% will develop cancer. The incidence of duodenal adenomas in MAP appears to be lower than in FAP, but the limited available data suggest a comparable increase in the relative risk and lifetime risk of duodenal cancer. Current surveillance recommendations, however, are the same for FAP and MAP, using the Spigelman score (incorporating polyp number, size, dysplasia, and histology) for risk stratification and determination of surveillance intervals. Previous studies have demonstrated a benefit of enhanced detection rates of adenomas by use of chromoendoscopy both in sporadic colorectal disease and in groups at high risk of colorectal cancer. We aimed to assess the effect of chromoendoscopy on duodenal adenoma detection, to determine the impact on Spigelman stage and to compare this in individuals with known pathogenic mutations in order to determine the difference in duodenal involvement between MAP and FAP. METHODS: A prospective study examined the impact of chromoendoscopy on the assessment of the duodenum in 51 consecutive patients with MAP and FAP in 2 academic centers in the United Kingdom (University Hospital Llandough, Cardiff, and St Mark's Hospital, London) from 2011 to 2014. RESULTS: Enhanced adenoma detection of 3 times the number of adenomas after chromoendoscopy was demonstrated in both MAP (P = .013) and FAP (P = .002), but did not affect adenoma size. In both conditions, there was a significant increase in Spigelman stage after chromoendoscopy compared with endoscopy without dye spray. Spigelman scores and overall adenoma detection was significantly lower in MAP compared with FAP. CONCLUSIONS: Chromoendoscopy improved the diagnostic yield of anomas in MAP and FAP 3-fold, and in both MAP and FAP this resulted in a clinically significant upstaging in Spigelman score. Further studies are required to determine the impact of improved adenoma detection on the management and outcome of duodenal polyposis.

Changes in scoring of Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms and the impact on competence assessment.

BACKGROUND: Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) is an established competence assessment tool in endoscopy. In July 2016, the DOPS scoring format changed from a performance-based scale to a supervision-based scale. We aimed to evaluate the impact of changes to the DOPS scale format on the distribution of scores in novice trainees and on competence assessment. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter (n = 276), observational study of formative DOPS assessments in endoscopy trainees with ≤ 100 lifetime procedures. DOPS were submitted in the 6-months before July 2016 (old scale) and after (new scale) for gastroscopy (n = 2998), sigmoidoscopy (n = 1310), colonoscopy (n = 3280), and polypectomy (n = 631). Scores for old and new DOPS were aligned to a 4-point scale and compared. RESULTS: 8219 DOPS (43 % new and 57 % old) submitted for 1300 trainees were analyzed. Compared with old DOPS, the use of the new DOPS was associated with greater utilization of the lowest score (2.4 % vs. 0.9 %; P < 0.001), broader range of scores, and a reduction in competent scores (60.8 % vs. 86.9 %; P < 0.001). The reduction in competent scores was evident on subgroup analysis across all procedure types (P < 0.001) and for each quartile of endoscopy experience. The new DOPS was superior in characterizing the endoscopy learning curve by demonstrating progression of competent scores across quartiles of procedural experience. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy assessors applied a greater range of scores using the new DOPS scale based on degree of supervision in two cohorts of trainees matched for experience. Our study provides construct validity evidence in support of the new scale format.

Factors associated with delayed bleeding after resection of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND: Delayed bleeding is the most common significant complication after piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (p-EMR) of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (NPCPs). Risk factors for delayed bleeding are incompletely defined. We aimed to determine risk factors for delayed bleeding following p-EMR. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a prospective tertiary center audit of patients with NPCPs ≥ 20 mm who underwent p-EMR between 2010 and 2012. Patient, polyp, and procedure-related data were collected. Four post p-EMR defect factors were evaluated for interobserver agreement and included in analysis. Delayed bleeding severity was reported in accordance with guidelines. Predictors of bleeding were identified. RESULTS: Delayed bleeding requiring hospitalization occurred after 22 of 330 procedures (6.7 %). A total of 11 patients required blood transfusion; of these, 4 underwent urgent colonoscopy, 1 underwent radiological embolization, and 1 required surgery. Interobserver agreement for identification of the four post p-EMR defect factors was moderate (kappa range 0.52 - 0.57). Factors associated with delayed bleeding were visible muscle fibers (P = 0.03) and the presence of a "cherry red spot" (P = 0.05) in the post p-EMR defect. Factors not associated with delayed bleeding were American Association of Anesthesiologists class, aspirin use, polyp size, site, and use of argon plasma coagulation. CONCLUSIONS: Visible muscle fibers and the presence of a "cherry red spot" in the resection defect were associated with delayed bleeding after p-EMR. These findings suggest evaluation and photodocumentation of the post p-EMR defect is important and, when considered alongside other patient and procedural factors, may help to reduce the incidence and severity of delayed bleeding.