Factors Associated With Inpatient Endoscopy Delay and its Impact on Hospital Length-of-Stay and 30-Day Readmission.

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: Inpatient endoscopy delay (IED) negatively impacts the delivery of high-quality care. We aimed to identify factors associated with IED and evaluate its effect on hospital length-of-stay (LOS) and readmission. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all inpatient endoscopies performed between November 2017 and November 2019 at a tertiary care center. IED was defined as the number of days elapsed between anticipated versus actual procedure day. Data were extracted from the endoscopy documentation software and via electronic chart review. Multivariate logistic regressions were modeled to determine variables associated with IED and hospital readmission. RESULTS: A total of 4239 inpatients (mean age, 58.3 years; 50.3% women) underwent endoscopic procedures during the study period of which 819 patients (19.3%) experienced a delay. IED resulted in a median prolonged LOS of 2 days (interquartile range, 1-2 days). Patients with IED were less likely to have an etiology identified on endoscopy (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.86; P < .001). The 2 most common causes for delays were poor bowel preparation (n = 218; 27%) and lack of endoscopy personnel/unit availability (n = 197; 24.4%). Independent predictors of IED included: older age (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .03), female sex (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03-1.40; P = .02), use of antithrombotics (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.08-1.57; P = .006), opioids (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.44; P = .012), being on contact isolation (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.09-1.75; P = .008), and colonoscopy (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.27-1.77; P < .001). Conversely, inpatients admitted to a dedicated GI medicine service were less likely to have IED (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.96; P = .02). IED was the only independent predictor of 30-day readmission (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.02-1.47; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: IED occurred frequently, unfavorably prolonged LOS, and was an independent risk factor for 30-day readmission. We provide a comprehensive analysis of actionable variables associated with IED that can be targeted to improve inpatient endoscopy delivery.

Discrepancy between self-reported and actual colonoscopy polypectomy practices for the removal of small polyps.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cold snare polypectomy (CSP) is associated with higher rates of complete resection compared with cold biopsy forceps (CBF) for the removal of small polyps (4-9 mm). This study aimed to evaluate self-reported polypectomy preferences and actual practice patterns among endoscopists at an academic center and to identify factors associated with the use of CSP for small polyps. METHODS: In phase A, endoscopists completed a survey evaluating preferences for polypectomy techniques. In phase B, we performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive colonoscopies with polypectomy (January 2016 to September 2018). Uni- and multivariate analysis were performed to identify factors associated with CSP for small polyps. RESULTS: Nineteen of 26 (73%) endoscopists completed the survey (phase A); 3 (15.8%) were interventional endoscopists. Most respondents indicated that they use CSP (89.5%) for small polyps and identified no reasons for choosing CBF over CSP (73.7%). In phase B, we identified 1118 colonoscopies with 2625 polypectomies for polyps ≤9 mm. Most diminutive polyps (≤3 mm) were removed with CBF (819 of 912; 90%). CBF (46.2%) was also preferentially used for removal of small polyps (n = 1713), followed by hot snare polypectomy (27.2%), and CSP (26.6%). On multivariate analysis, interventional endoscopists were associated with a higher likelihood of using CSP for small polyps (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.79; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Significant discrepancy exists between self-reported preferences and actual polypectomy practices. CBF is still preferentially used over CSP for the removal of polyps sized 4-9 mm; further strategies are needed to monitor and implement adequate polypectomy techniques.