Healthcare Cost of Over-Diagnosis of Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus.

INTRODUCTION: Published reports have demonstrated that many Barrett's esophagus patients are over-diagnosed as low-grade dysplasia (BE-LGD). We performed an analysis of the surveillance and treatment costs associated with the over-diagnosis of BE-LGD. METHODS: As the principal cost variables, we used endoscopic and histologic procedures performed during the recommended surveillance intervals for patients with BE-LGD, the national average Medicare reimbursement for the Current Procedural Terminology codes of the procedures performed, and a spreadsheet-based tool we created to determine the overall healthcare cost associated with the over-diagnosis of BE-LGD in the US population. RESULTS: The average excess cost (range) for every patient in the US who is over-diagnosed with BE-LGD is estimated to be $5557 ($3115 to $8072). The principal contributors to the excess cost of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD in these patients are: endoscopy ($2626 to $4639), pathologist biopsy review ($275 to $2185), and esophagogastroduodenoscopy-guided endoscopic ablation ($214 to $1249). CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare cost of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD is significant. To reduce the overall healthcare cost impact of over-diagnosis of BE-LGD, strict adherence to the recommendations of the American Gastroenterological Association, American College of Gastroenterology, and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy that pathology review of all BE biopsy specimens be performed by a gastrointestinal pathologist is warranted.

Longitudinal assessment of colonoscopy quality indicators: a report from the Gastroenterology Practice Management Group.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand for colonoscopy quality measures for procedures performed in ambulatory surgery centers. Benchmarks such as adenoma detection rate (ADR) are traditionally reported as static, one-dimensional point estimates at a provider or practice level. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 6-year variability of ADRs for 370 gastroenterologists from across the nation. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Collaborative quality metrics database from 2007 to 2012. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent colonoscopies in ambulatory surgery centers. INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The number of colonoscopies with an adenomatous polyp divided by the total number of colonoscopies (ADR-T), inclusive of indication and patient's sex. RESULTS: Data from 368,157 colonoscopies were included for analysis from 11 practices. Three practice sites (5, 8, and 10) were significantly above and 2 sites (3, 7) were significantly below mean ADR-T, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). High-performing sites had 9.0% higher ADR-T than sites belonging to the lowest quartile (P < .001). The mean ADR-T remained stable for 9 of 11 sites. Regression analysis showed that the 2 practice sites where ADR-T varied had significant improvements in ADR-T during the 6-year period. For each, mean ADR-T improved an average of 0.5% per quarter for site 2 (P = .001) and site 3 (P = .021), which were average and low performers, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Summary-level data, which does not allow cross-reference of variables at an individual level. CONCLUSION: We found performance disparities among practice sites remaining relatively consistent over a 6-year period. The ability of certain sites to sustain their high-performance over 6 years suggests that further research is needed to identify key organizational processes and physician incentives that improve the quality of colonoscopy.

Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope study group.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy has been adopted as the preferred method to screen for colorectal neoplasia in the United States. However, lesions can be missed because of numerous factors, including location on the proximal aspect of folds or flexures, where they may be difficult to detect with the forward-viewing colonoscope. The Third Eye Retroscope (TER) is a disposable device that is passed through the instrument channel of a standard colonoscope to provide a retrograde view that complements the forward view of the colonoscope during withdrawal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether experience with the TER affects polyp detection rates and procedure times in experienced endoscopists who had not previously used the equipment. DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS: This was an open-label, prospective, multicenter study at 9 U.S. sites, involving 298 patients presenting for colonoscopy, evaluating the use of the TER in combination with a standard colonoscope. INTERVENTIONS: After cecal intubation, the TER was inserted through the instrument channel of the colonoscope. During withdrawal, the forward and retrograde video images were observed simultaneously on a wide-screen monitor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were the number and size of adenomas and all polyps detected with the standard colonoscope and with the colonoscope combined with the TER. Secondary outcome measures were withdrawal phase time and total procedure time. Each endoscopist examined 20 subjects, divided into quartiles according to the order of their procedures, and results were compared among quartiles. RESULTS: Overall, 182 polyps were detected with the colonoscope and 27 additional polyps with the TER, a 14.8% increase (P < .001). A total of 100 adenomas were detected with the colonoscope and 16 more with the TER, a 16.0% increase (P < .001). For procedures performed after each endoscopist had completed 15 procedures while using the TER, the mean additional detection rates with the TER were 17.0% for all polyps (P < .001) and 25.0% for adenomas (P < .001). For lesions 6 mm or larger, the overall additional detection rates with the TER for all polyps and for adenomas were 23.2% and 24.3%, respectively. For lesions 10 mm or larger, the overall additional detection rates with the TER for all polyps and for adenomas were 22.6% and 19.0%, respectively. The mean withdrawal times in the first and fourth quartiles were 10.6 and 9.2 minutes, respectively (P = .044). LIMITATIONS: There was no randomization or separate control group. The endoscopists judged whether each lesion could have been detected with the colonscope alone by using their standard technique. CONCLUSIONS: Polyp detection rates improved significantly with the TER, especially after 15 procedures, when the mean additional detection rate for adenomas was 25.0%. Additional detection rates with the TER for medium-size and large adenomas were greater than for smaller lesions. These results suggest that, compared with a colonoscope alone, a retrograde-viewing device can increase detection rates for clinically significant adenomas without detriment to procedure time or procedure complications. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00969124.).

Health care value-based purchasing.

Two Institute of Medicine studies have focused attention on the glaring deficiencies in health care safety and quality. These studies and others serve as wake-up calls within both the private and government-sponsored United States health care industry. As a result of the "quality chasm" and crippling rise in health care cost, the concept of value-based purchasing (VBP) has gained increasing momentum. The stakeholders affected by the health care value equation include consumers, employers, insurers, and providers. VBP creates quality standards and stakeholder incentives to improve quality of care and become more cost efficient. The greatest challenge is the development of methods and information sources that will allow reliable, accurate, and credible measures of health care quality. VBP presents the ambitious hope of creating transparent measures of quality and cost efficiency that would allow the consumer to make health care purchasing decisions. If this can be achieved, then the competitive forces that increase value in other industries will function in health care.

Assessing the financial health of the endoscopy center.

Just as a trend of a patient's physiologic vital signs is more informative than a single assessment, the most reliable measure of EASC financial health is achieved over a continuum of time. The earliest estimate of prognosis is accomplished with a business plan that is based on an analysis of practice history, strategic planning, and carefully derived assumptions. Periodic assessments of financial performance with benchmarking data provide a current assessment of health and allow trending of performance improvements or decline. Assurance of future financial health is derived from focusing on customer needs, developing EASC core competence, and creating value through innovation. Following these guidelines helps to ensure a strong, productive, and long-lasting EASC.