Point-of-care, peer-comparator colonoscopy practice audit: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Quality Program--Endoscopy.
BACKGROUND
Point-of-care practice audits allow documentation of procedural outcomes to support quality improvement in endoscopic practice.


OBJECTIVE
To evaluate a colonoscopists' practice audit tool that provides point-of-care data collection and peer-comparator feedback.


METHODS
A prospective, observational colonoscopy practice audit was conducted in academic and community endoscopy units for unselected patients undergoing colonoscopy. Anonymized colonoscopist, patient and practice data were collected using touchscreen smartphones with automated data upload for data analysis and review by participants. The main outcome measures were the following colonoscopy quality indicators: colonoscope insertion and withdrawal times, bowel preparation quality, sedation, immediate complications and polypectomy, and biopsy rates.


RESULTS
Over a span of 16 months, 62 endoscopists reported on 1279 colonoscopy procedures. The mean cecal intubation rate was 94.9% (10th centile 84.2%). The mean withdrawal time was 8.8 min and, for nonpolypectomy colonoscopies, 41.9% of colonoscopists reported a mean withdrawal time of less than 6 min. Polypectomy was performed in 37% of colonoscopies. Independent predictors of polypectomy included the following: endoscopy unit type, patient age, interval since previous colonoscopy, bowel preparation quality, stable inflammatory bowel disease, previous colon polyps and withdrawal time. Withdrawal times of less than 6 min were associated with lower polyp removal rates (mean difference -11.3% [95% CI -2.8% to -19.9%]; P=0.01).


CONCLUSIONS
Cecal intubation rates exceeded 90% and polypectomy rates exceeded 30%, but withdrawal times were frequently shorter than recommended. There are marked practice variations consistent with previous observations.


CONCLUSIONS
Real-time, point-of-care practice audits with prompt, confidential access to outcome data provide a basis for targeted educational programs to improve quality in colonoscopy practice.
Division of Gastroenterology, McMaster University, Hamilton. armstro@mcmaster.ca
David
D
Armstrong
Roger
R
Hollingworth
Donald
D
Macintosh
Ying
Y
Chen
Sandra
S
Daniels
Stuart
S
Gittens
Ronald
R
Bridges
Paul
P
Sinclair
Catherine
C
Dubé
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D002170:Canada; D003111:Colonic Polyps / Q000601:surgery; D003113:Colonoscopy / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D008485:Medical Audit; D019095:Point-of-Care Systems; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians'; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care; D055815:Young Adult
JAMA. 2008 Sep 24;300(12):1417-22
18812532
Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Apr;101(4):873-85
16635231
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Feb;8(2):166-73
19850154
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008 Oct;6(10):1091-8
18639495
Can J Gastroenterol. 2006 Jun;20(6):405-10
16779458
Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Apr;63(4 Suppl):S16-28
16564908
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Mar;61(3):378-84
15758907
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Mar;102(3):478-81
17335442
Can J Gastroenterol. 2008 Feb;22(2):155-60
18299734
Endoscopy. 2009 Dec;41(12):1069-74
19899028
Can J Gastroenterol. 2007 Nov;21 Suppl D:5D-24D
18026582
Can J Gastroenterol. 2008 Jan;22(1):17-22
18209776
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Jul;58(1):76-9
12838225
Gastroenterology. 2000 Mar;118(3):619-24
10702214
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Mar;61(3):371-5
15758905
Can J Gastroenterol. 2007 Dec;21(12):797-801
18080050
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Sep 15;22(6):571-8
16167974
Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jun;97(6):1296-308
12094842
N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 14;355(24):2533-41
17167136
Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Apr;59(4):482-6
15044882
Can J Gastroenterol. 2008 Feb;22(2):161-7
18299735