Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2015
The association of colonoscopy quality indicators with the detection of screen-relevant lesions, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers in an asymptomatic Canadian colorectal cancer screening population.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hilsden Robert J, Dube Catherine, Heitman Steven J, Bridges Ronald, McGregor S Elizabeth, Rostom Alaa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although several quality indicators of colonoscopy have been defined, quality assurance activities should be directed at the measurement of quality indicators that are predictive of key screening colonoscopy outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine the association among established quality indicators and the detection of screen-relevant lesions (SRLs), adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers.
DESIGN: Historical cohort study.
SETTING: Canadian colorectal cancer screening center.
PATIENTS: A total of 18,456 asymptomatic men and women ages 40 to 74, at either average risk or increased risk for colorectal cancer because of a family history, who underwent a screening colonoscopy from 2008 to 2010.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Using univariate and multivariate analyses, we explored the association among procedural quality indicators and 3 colonoscopy outcomes: detection of SRLs, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers.
RESULTS: The crude rates of SRLs, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers were 240, 6.44, and .54 per 1000 colonoscopies, respectively. Several indicators, including endoscopist withdrawal time (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4) and cecal intubation rate (OR, 13.9; 95% CI, 1.9-96.9), were associated with the detection of SRLs. No quality indicator was associated with the risk of adverse events. Endoscopist average withdrawal time over 6 minutes (OR, .12; 95% CI, .002-.85) and SRL detection rate over 20% (OR, .17; 95% CI, .03-.74) were associated with a reduced risk of postcolonoscopy cancers.
LIMITATIONS: Single-center study.
CONCLUSION: Quality assurance programs should prioritize the measurement of endoscopist average withdrawal time and adenoma (SRL) detection rate.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine the association among established quality indicators and the detection of screen-relevant lesions (SRLs), adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers.
DESIGN: Historical cohort study.
SETTING: Canadian colorectal cancer screening center.
PATIENTS: A total of 18,456 asymptomatic men and women ages 40 to 74, at either average risk or increased risk for colorectal cancer because of a family history, who underwent a screening colonoscopy from 2008 to 2010.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Using univariate and multivariate analyses, we explored the association among procedural quality indicators and 3 colonoscopy outcomes: detection of SRLs, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers.
RESULTS: The crude rates of SRLs, adverse events, and postcolonoscopy cancers were 240, 6.44, and .54 per 1000 colonoscopies, respectively. Several indicators, including endoscopist withdrawal time (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4) and cecal intubation rate (OR, 13.9; 95% CI, 1.9-96.9), were associated with the detection of SRLs. No quality indicator was associated with the risk of adverse events. Endoscopist average withdrawal time over 6 minutes (OR, .12; 95% CI, .002-.85) and SRL detection rate over 20% (OR, .17; 95% CI, .03-.74) were associated with a reduced risk of postcolonoscopy cancers.
LIMITATIONS: Single-center study.
CONCLUSION: Quality assurance programs should prioritize the measurement of endoscopist average withdrawal time and adenoma (SRL) detection rate.