Development of a national automated endoscopy database: The United Kingdom National Endoscopy Database (NED)

Assessment of the impact of power business intelligence on adenoma detection rate: a prospective observational trial

BACKGROUND

Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key quality indicator in colonoscopy, with low ADRs linked to higher risks of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers. Feedback to endoscopists has been shown to improve ADRs; however, many feedback systems lack automation and real-time interactivity. This study evaluates the effectiveness of Power Business Intelligence (Power BI) on ADR enhancement.

METHODS

This prospective observational study compared ADRs before (2021) and after (2022) the implementation of Power BI at Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Taiwan. Power BI automatically processed pathology data to calculate ADRs and provided real-time visual feedback on endoscopy quality indicators. A total of 4,306 colonoscopies performed by 10 endoscopists were analyzed. Logistic regression was employed to identify factors associated with ADR.

RESULTS

The overall ADR was high and comparable between the periods without and with Power BI (50.1% vs. 47.9%, P = 0.152). Individual performance was stable, though one low-performing endoscopist improved ADR by 20.0%. Adjusted multivariate analysis found no association between Power BI and ADR. Higher ADRs correlated with male gender (odds ratio [OR], 1.638; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.438-1.864; p < 0.001), advanced age (OR, 1.642; CI, 1.439-1.875; p < 0.001), elevated BMI (OR, 1.642; CI, 1.439-1.875; p < 0.001), and positive stool occult blood (OR, 1.829; CI, 1.545-2.167; p < 0.001). Effective technical practices for improving ADRs included polyethylene glycol preparation (OR, 1.246; CI, 1.063-1.462; p = 0.007), water-method colonoscopy (OR, 1.321; CI, 1.134-1.538; p < 0.001), and withdrawal times ≥ 6 min (OR, 6.370; CI, 5.179-7.837; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of Power BI was not associated with a higher ADR at a high-performing institution but may benefit low-performing endoscopists. Efforts should target behavioral changes in modifiable technical factors to drive meaningful ADR improvements.

Performance measures for small-bowel endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative - Update 2025

Quality markers and patient experience are being implemented to ensure standardization of practice across gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy procedures. The set benchmarks ensure high quality procedures are delivered and linked to measurable outcomes.There has been an increase in the demand for small-bowel endoscopy. In 2019, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) embarked on setting performance measures for small-bowel endoscopy. This included major (key) and minor performance indicators for both small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE). These suggested quality indicators cover all procedure domains, from patient selection and preparation, to intraprocedural aspects such as pathology identification, appropriate management, the patient experience, and post-procedure complications. Since 2019, there has been an increase in published studies looking at different aspects of small-bowel endoscopy, including real-world data. This paper provides an update on the 2019 performance measures, considering the latest literature.

Sustained success in endoscopic performance demonstrated by the Irish National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Programme

Background and study aims

The National Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement (NEQI) Programme captures over 94% of endoscopic activity in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), accounting for > 120,000 colonoscopies per annum. The aim of this study was to assess temporal changes in colonoscopy Key Quality Indicators (KQIs) at a national level over a 5-year period among low-, intermediate-, and high-volume endoscopists.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all NEQI colonoscopy episodes occurring between 2016 and 2022, collating colonoscopy KQIs (cecal intubation rate [CIR], comfort score [CS], polyp detection rate [PDR] and sedation use). Endoscopists with 5 consecutive years of activity were defined as low, intermediate, or high activity according to annual procedural volumes.

Results

Over 658,000 colonoscopies were completed by 1240 endoscopists. Workload is disproportionate, with 36% of endoscopists completing 66% of national colonoscopy volume. Low-, intermediate-, and high-activity endoscopists all demonstrated sustained improvements in KQI targets over the study period. Comparing experts (≥ 300 colonoscopies/year) vs non-experts, KQI plateaus were demonstrated for PDR at < 150 colonoscopies per year (34.2% vs 29.6%, P = 0.002), CS at < 200 procedures per year (97.5% vs 94.9%, P < 0.001), and CIR at < 250 colonoscopies per year (94.5% vs 93.4%, P = 0.048).

Conclusions

This study represents the first published endoscopist-level NEQI data demonstrating ongoing KQI improvements for endoscopists at all activity levels. Sustaining this improvement and continuing to capture national endoscopic performance will remain a core role of the Irish NEQI program. Workforce imbalances and minimum annual volumes continue to represent challenges for national endoscopy programs.

Expansion of interventional endoscopy and day-case procedures: A nationwide longitudinal study of gastrointestinal endoscopy in France

BACKGROUND

An accurate assessment of the evolution of GI endoscopy volumes is warranted to identify long-term trends and to help anticipate training, infrastructure and human resource needs. The main objective of this longitudinal study was to evaluate the evolution of GI endoscopy in France.

METHODS

This retrospective study consisted of a cross-sectional analysis repeated each year from 2008 to 2018 using data from a national health database related to hospital admissions. All day-case and hospital stays presenting at least one of the 119 GI endoscopy procedures were extracted.

RESULTS

This study showed an increase in day-case and hospital stays including a GI endoscopy procedure of 18.4 %. In addition, day-case endoscopy increased from 67.8 % to 76.9 % of hospital admissions. There was a 19.6 % increase in lower GI endoscopy, with in particular a 247 % increase in endoscopic mucosal resection. EUS and pancreaticobiliary and duodenal endoscopy have seen the most significant increases, 63 % and 70.2 % respectively; notably, therapeutic EUS increased by 476 %.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the good dynamics of GI endoscopy in a European country with a sustained increase over 11 years in day-case and hospital stays of patients undergoing a GI endoscopy while day-case endoscopy is taking on an increasingly important role.

Areas of improvement for colorectal cancer screening: Results of a screening initiative for 10,000 health care employees in Austria

Background and study aims Participation in and quality of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening varies greatly and it is unclear how much of CRC screening guideline quality metrics reach patients. The aims of this prospective observational study were to provide data from everyday practice in Austria. Patients and methods All employees aged ≥ 50 years were invited and received a stool-based-test (FIT (cut-off 25 mcg Hb/g) and M2PK), which could be dropped off at the workplace. All individuals with positive tests were called and offered a colonoscopy near their workplace/home in ≤ 3 weeks performed by unselected endoscopists. Non-attendees received email and telephone reminders. Results Of 10,239 eligible employees (2706 males, 7533 females), 2390 (23%) (plus 673 < 50 years) median age 53 (interquartile range 50;56) participated in the stool-based screening (18% males, 25% females). Of 3063 tests, 747 (24%) were positive. The follow-up rate for 616 individuals who accepted or eventually underwent colonoscopy was 84% (n = 517). The adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 20.5% (31% in men, 17% in women) and varied substantially, ranging from 15% in hospitals (excluding the study center) to 18.5% among office-based endoscopists, and up to 36% in the study center. Most European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-recommended performance indicators were unmet, including the polyp detection rate (PDR), ADR, reporting of polyp characteristics, and bowel preparation adequacy. Conclusions There is a serious gap between recommended standards and real-world CRC screening colonoscopy quality. Implementation of CRC screening should not only be accompanied by strategies to increase participation rates but focus on implementation of rigorous, mandatory colonoscopy quality assurance programs.

Overview of a national endoscopy database: The Trans.IT database and its impact on data registration quality

BACKGROUND

The Trans.IT database is a national gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy database developed in 2012. It automatically collects anonymous data from GI endoscopy procedures in a centralized database. All endoscopists use a structured reporting tool for uniform data collection. In this study, we aim to provide an overview of the database and to evaluate its impact on data registration quality.

METHODS

We used all ERCPs, colonoscopies and colorectal cancer (CRC)-screening colonoscopies performed between 2016 and 2020. We excluded centers joining after 2016 and patients below age 18. Data registration quality for ERCPs included completeness of data for: intention of ERCP, Schutz score, ASA classification, papillary status (virgin or previous sphincterotomy), cannulation (success or failure to cannulate the desired duct) and procedural success. For colonoscopies: indication, ASA-classification, Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS), cecal intubation, polyp detection rate (PDR). For CRC-screening colonoscopies, ASA-classification, BBPS, cecal intubation, PDR and adenoma detection rate (ADR).

RESULTS

A total of 14,156 ERCPs, 150,962 colonoscopies and 37,199 colorectal cancer screening colonoscopies were included in our analysis. For ERCPs, registration of procedural intention, Schutz score, ASA classification, papillary status, cannulation and procedural success improved from 34.9%, 32.7%, 72.6%, 36.5%, 34.6%, 27.2% in 2016, to 86.4%, 84.6%, 97.4%, 86.4%, 82.1%, 84.0%, respectively, in 2020. For non-screening colonoscopies, registration of indication, ASA classification, BBPS, cecal intubation and PDR improved from 40.4%, 60.5%, 47.6%, 69.8% and 32.3% in 2016 to 90.3%, 88.9%, 59.8%, 79.1% and 39.1%, respectively, in 2020. For CRC-cancer screening colonoscopy registration equaled outcome, PDR and ADR changed from 74.7% to 63.6% in 2016 to 66.3% and 53.8% in 2020, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of endoscopy data registration has consistently improved over the years by using the Trans.IT database. This is most likely the result of feedback to performing endoscopists to review performance in real-time online and progressive awareness of quality of data registration.

Virtual reality intervention to improve quality of care during colonoscopy: a hybrid type 1 randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Effective management of patients' pain, anxiety, and discomfort during colonoscopy is crucial for successful completion of the procedure, patient adherence to follow-up examinations, and patient satisfaction. Virtual reality (VR) interventions, as a nonpharmacologic and innovative solution, have demonstrated promising results in managing these outcomes. Nevertheless, there is limited evidence on their effectiveness and implementation. This trial aimed to test clinical effectiveness and identify factors to facilitate the implementation of VR during colonoscopy.

METHODS

A hybrid type 1 effectiveness implementation, parallel randomized controlled, open-label trial was conducted. Fifty patients were randomized (1:1) to a VR or a control group. The effectiveness (pain, anxiety, discomfort, medication use, and satisfaction) and implementation (reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) outcomes were assessed before, during, and after colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Patients in the VR group reported significantly lower pain (P = .043) and discomfort (P <.0001) during colonoscopy, had a higher number of completed colonoscopies without sedation (P = .003), and showed higher satisfaction (P = .032). The major barrier to the implementation and maintenance of the VR intervention was inadequate VR content design. Staff were most worried about altered patient communications, unclear responsibilities, increasing workload, and patient safety. Patients expressed willingness to reuse VR glasses and to suggest them to other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

VR can be used as a nonpharmacologic method for pain management and for overcoming anxiety and discomfort during colonoscopy. VR can improve patients' satisfaction and diminish the need for sedative medications; accordingly, it has the potential to promote cooperation and compliance among patients and increase screening colonoscopy rates. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05723861.).

Nationally Automated Colonoscopy Performance Feedback Increases Polyp Detection: The NED APRIQOT Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates are higher for endoscopists with low polyp detection rates. Using the UK's National Endoscopy Database (NED), which automatically captures real-time data, we assessed if providing feedback of case-mix-adjusted mean number of polyps (aMNP), as a key performance indicator, improved endoscopists' performance. Feedback was delivered via a theory-informed, evidence-based audit and feedback intervention.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, NED Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial randomized National Health Service endoscopy centers to intervention or control. Intervention-arm endoscopists were e-mailed tailored monthly reports automatically generated within NED, informed by qualitative interviews and behavior change theory. The primary outcome was endoscopists' aMNP during the 9-month intervention.

RESULTS

From November 2020 to July 2021, 541 endoscopists across 36 centers (19 intervention; 17 control) performed 54,770 procedures during the intervention, and 15,960 procedures during the 3-month postintervention period. Comparing the intervention arm with the control arm, endoscopists during the intervention period: aMNP was nonsignificantly higher (7%; 95% CI, -1% to 14%; P = .08). The unadjusted MNP (10%; 95% CI, 1%-20%) and polyp detection rate (10%; 95% CI, 4%-16%) were significantly higher. Differences were not maintained in the postintervention period. In the intervention arm, endoscopists accessing NED Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial webpages had a higher aMNP than those who did not (aMNP, 118 vs 102; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Although our automated feedback intervention did not increase aMNP significantly in the intervention period, MNP and polyp detection rate did improve significantly. Engaged endoscopists benefited most and improvements were not maintained postintervention; future work should address engagement in feedback and consider the effectiveness of continuous feedback.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY

 www.isrctn.org ISRCTN11126923 .

Diagnostic yield from symptomatic gastroscopy in the UK: British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database

OBJECTIVE

This national analysis aimed to calculate the diagnostic yield from gastroscopy for common symptoms, guiding improved resource utilisation.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted of diagnostic gastroscopies between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. Mixed-effect logistic regression models were used, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, age and sex) effects on two dependent variables (endoscopic cancer; Barrett's oesophagus (BO) diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

382 370 diagnostic gastroscopies were analysed; 30.4% were performed in patients aged <50 and 57.7% on female patients. The overall unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.0% (males 1.7%; females 0.6%, p<0.01). Other major pathology was found in 9.1% of procedures, whereas 89.9% reported only normal findings or minor pathology (92.5% in females; 94.6% in patients <50).Highest cancer aPPVs were reached in the over 50s (1.3%), in those with dysphagia (3.0%) or weight loss plus another symptom (1.4%). Cancer aPPVs for all other symptoms were below 1%, and for those under 50, remained below 1% regardless of symptom. Overall, 73.7% of gastroscopies were carried out in patient groups where aPPV cancer was <1%.The overall unadjusted PPV for BO was 4.1% (males 6.1%; females 2.7%, p<0.01). The aPPV for BO for reflux was 5.8% and ranged from 3.2% to 4.0% for other symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer yield was highest in elderly male patients, and those over 50 with dysphagia. Three-quarters of all gastroscopies were performed on patients whose cancer risk was <1%, suggesting inefficient resource utilisation.

Quantifying the cost savings and health impacts of improving colonoscopy quality: an economic evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To estimate and quantify the cost implications and health impacts of improving the performance of English endoscopy services to the optimum quality as defined by postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) rates.

DESIGN

A semi-Markov state-transition model was constructed, following the logical treatment pathway of individuals who could potentially undergo a diagnostic colonoscopy. The model consisted of three identical arms, each representing a high, middle or low-performing trust's endoscopy service, defined by PCCRC rates. A cohort of 40-year-old individuals was simulated in each arm of the model. The model's time horizon was when the cohort reached 90 years of age and the total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated for all trusts. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

A 40-year-old individual gains 0.0006 QALYs and savings of £6.75 over the model lifetime by attending a high-performing trust compared with attending a middle-performing trust and gains 0.0012 QALYs and savings of £14.64 compared with attending a low-performing trust. For the population of England aged between 40 and 86, if all low and middle-performing trusts were improved to the level of a high-performing trust, QALY gains of 14 044 and cost savings of £249 311 295 are possible. Higher quality trusts dominated lower quality trusts; any improvement in the PCCRC rate was cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Improving the quality of endoscopy services would lead to QALY gains among the population, in addition to cost savings to the healthcare provider. If all middle and low-performing trusts were improved to the level of a high-performing trust, our results estimate that the English National Health Service would save approximately £5 million per year.

Diagnostic yield from symptomatic lower gastrointestinal endoscopy in the UK: A British Society of Gastroenterology analysis using data from the National Endoscopy Database

BACKGROUND

The value of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy (LGIE; colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy) relates to its ability to detect clinically relevant findings, predominantly cancers, preneoplastic polyps or inflammatory bowel disease. There are concerns that many LGIEs are performed on low-risk patients with limited benefit.

AIMS

To determine the diagnostic outcomes of LGIE for common symptoms.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of diagnostic LGIE between March 2019 and February 2020 using the UK National Endoscopy Database. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models, incorporating random (endoscopist) and fixed (symptoms, patient age, and sex) effects upon two dependent variables (large polyp [≥10 mm] and cancer diagnosis). Adjusted positive predictive values (aPPVs) were calculated.

RESULTS

We analysed 384,510 LGIEs; 33.2% were performed on patients aged under 50 and 53.6% on women. Regarding colonoscopies, the unadjusted PPV for cancer was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.4-1.5); higher for men than women (1.9% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01). The PPV for large polyps was 3.2% (95% CI: 3.1-3.2). The highest colonoscopy cancer aPPVs were in the over 50s (1.9%) and in those with rectal bleeding (2.5%) or anaemia (2.1%). Cancer aPPVs for other symptoms were <1% despite representing 54.3% of activity. In patients under 50, aPPVs were 0.4% for cancer and 1.6% for large polyps. Results were similar for sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colonoscopies were performed on patients with low-risk symptoms, where cancer risk was similar to the general population. Cancer and large polyp yield was highest in elderly patients with rectal bleeding or anaemia, although still fell short of FIT-based screening yields.

Colonoscopic cancer detection rate: a new performance measure - is it FIT for purpose?

Introduction

Gastrointestinal symptoms correlate poorly with cancer diagnosis. A faecal immunochemical test (FIT) result of ≥10 µg has high sensitivity and negative predictive value for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection. An FIT-based diagnostic pathway may lead to more effective resource utilisation. We aimed to use National Endoscopy Database (NED) data to create a new colonoscopy performance measure, cancer detection rate (CDR) to assess the appropriate identification of target populations for colonoscopy; then to use CDR to assess the impact of implementing an FIT-based referral pathway locally.

Methods

NED data were analysed to compare local diagnostic colonoscopic CDR in 2019 (prepathway revision) and 2021 (postpathway revision), benchmarked against overall national CDR for the same time frames.

Results

1, 123, 624 NED diagnostic colonoscopies were analysed. Locally, there was a significant increase in CDR between 2019 and 2021, from 3.01% (2.45%-3.47%) to 4.32% (3.69%-4.95%), p=0.003. The CDR increase was due to both a 10% increase in the number of CRCs detected and a 25% reduction in the number of diagnostic colonoscopies performed. Nationally, there was a smaller, but significant, increase in CDR from 2.02% (1.99%-2.07%) to 2.33% (2.29%-2.37%), p<0.001. The rate of increase in CDR% between 2019 and 2021 was significantly different locally compared with nationally.

Conclusion

Our study indicates that the introduction of a robustly vetted FIT-based algorithm to determine whether diagnostic colonoscopy is required, is effective in increasing the colonoscopic CDR. Moreover, CDR appears to be a meaningful performance metric that can be automatically calculated through NED, enabling monitoring of the quality of referral and vetting pathways.

Road map to small bowel endoscopy quality indicators

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Quality indicators for upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are well established and linked to patient outcomes. However, there is a perceived gap in the development and implementation of quality indicators for small bowel endoscopy. In this review, we aimed to discuss the development of quality indicators in small bowel endoscopy and their implementation in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

The proposed quality indicators for small bowel endoscopy focus on process measures, which mainly evaluate the procedural aspects, rather than the outcomes or the overall patient experience. These quality indicators have rarely been studied in clinical practice, leading to a limited understanding of their applicability and impact on patient outcomes and experience.

SUMMARY

Real-world studies evaluating the quality indicators of small bowel endoscopy are warranted to establish an evidence-based framework for their practical application and effectiveness. Linking these indicators to relevant patient outcomes is crucial for their broader acceptance and implementation.

Initiatives to increase colonoscopy capacity - is there an impact on polyp detection? A UK National Endoscopy Database analysis

BACKGROUND

 To address mismatch between routine endoscopy capacity and demand, centers often implement initiatives to increase capacity, such as weekend working or using locums/agency staff (insourcing). However, there are concerns that such initiatives may negatively impact quality. We investigated polyp detection for weekend vs. weekday and insourced vs. standard procedures using data from the UK National Endoscopy Database.

METHODS

 We conducted a national, retrospective, cross-sectional study of diagnostic colonoscopies performed during 01/01-04/04/2019. The primary outcome was mean number of polyps (MNP) and the secondary outcome was polyp detection rate (PDR). Multi-level mixed-effect regression, fitting endoscopist as a random effect, was used to examine associations between procedure day (weekend/weekday) and type (insourced/standard) and these outcomes, adjusting for patient age, sex, and indication.

RESULTS

 92 879 colonoscopies (weekends: 19 977 [21.5 %]; insourced: 9909 [10.7 %]) were performed by 2496 endoscopists. For weekend colonoscopies, patients were less often male or undergoing screening-related procedures; for insourced colonoscopies, patients were younger and less often undergoing screening-related procedures (all P < 0.05). Fully adjusted MNP was significantly lower for weekend vs. weekday (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.86 [95 %CI 0.83-0.89]) and for insourced vs. standard procedures (IRR 0.91 [95 %CI 0.87-0.95]). MNP was highest for weekday standard procedures and lowest for weekend insourced procedures; there was no interaction between procedure day and type. Similar associations were found for PDR.

CONCLUSIONS

 Strategies to increase colonoscopy capacity may negatively impact polyp detection and should be monitored for quality. Reasons for this unwarranted variation require investigation.

Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy procedure volume trends, perioperative mortality, and malpractice claims: Population-based analysis

Background and study aims Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) is one of the most common diagnostic procedures done to examine the foregut, but it can also be used for therapeutic interventions. The main objectives of this study were to investigate trends in EGD utilization and mortality related to it in a national low-threshold healthcare system, assess perioperative safety, and identify and describe patient-reported malpractice claims from the national database. Patients and methods We retrospectively identified patients from the Finnish Patient Care Registry who underwent diagnostic or procedural EGD between 2010 and 2018. In addition, patient-reported claims for malpractice were analyzed from the National Patient Insurance Center (PIC) database. Patient survival data were gathered collectively from the National Death Registry from Statistics Finland. Results During the study period, 409,153 EGDs were performed in Finland for 298,082 patients, with an annual rate of 9.30 procedures per 1,000 inhabitants, with an annual increase of 2.6%. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 1.70% and 90-day mortality was 3.84%. For every 1,000 patients treated, 0.23 malpractice claims were filed. Conclusions The annual rate of EGD increased by 2.6% during the study, while the rate of interventional procedures remained constant. Also, while the 30-day mortality rate declined over the study period, it is an unsuitable quality metric for EGDs in comprehensive centers because a patient's underlying disease plays a larger role than the procedure in perioperative mortality. Finally, there were few malpractice claims, with self-evident causes prevailing.

Device-assisted enteroscopy performance measures in the United Kingdom: DEEP-UK quality improvement project

BACKGROUND

Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) has become a well-established diagnostic and therapeutic tool for the management of small-bowel pathology. We aimed to evaluate the performance measures for DAE across the UK against the quality benchmarks proposed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE).

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on patient demographics and DAE performance measures from electronic endoscopy records of consecutive patients who underwent DAE for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes across 12 enteroscopy centers in the UK between January 2017 and December 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 2005 DAE procedures were performed in 1663 patients (median age 60 years; 53% men). Almost all procedures (98.1%) were performed for appropriate indications. Double-balloon enteroscopy was used for most procedures (82.0%), followed by single-balloon enteroscopy (17.2%) and spiral enteroscopy (0.7%). The estimated depth of insertion was documented in 73.4% of procedures. The overall diagnostic yield was 70.0%. Therapeutic interventions were performed in 42.6% of procedures, with a success rate of 96.6%. Overall, 78.0% of detected lesions were marked with a tattoo. Patient comfort was significantly better with the use of deep sedation compared with conscious sedation (99.7% vs. 68.5%; P<0.001). Major adverse events occurred in only 0.6% of procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance measures for DAE in the UK meet the ESGE quality benchmarks, with high diagnostic and therapeutic yields, and a low incidence of major adverse events. However, there is room for improvement in optimizing sedation practices, standardizing the depth of insertion documentation, and adopting marking techniques to aid in the follow-up of detected lesions.

Pediatric endoscopy: how can we improve patient outcomes and ensure best practices?

INTRODUCTION

Strategies to promote high-quality endoscopy in children require consensus around pediatric-specific quality standards and indicators. Using a rigorous guideline development process, the international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) was developed to support continuous quality improvement efforts within and across pediatric endoscopy services.

AREAS COVERED

This review presents a framework, informed by the PEnQuIN guidelines, for assessing endoscopist competence, granting procedural privileges, audit and feedback, and for skill remediation, when required. As is critical for promoting quality, PEnQuIN indicators can be benchmarked at the individual endoscopist, endoscopy facility, and endoscopy community levels. Furthermore, efforts to incorporate technologies, including electronic medical records and artificial intelligence, into endoscopic quality improvement processes can aid in creation of large-scale networks to facilitate comparison and standardization of quality indicator reporting across sites.

EXPERT OPINION

PEnQuIN quality standards and indicators provide a framework for continuous quality improvement in pediatric endoscopy, benefiting individual endoscopists, endoscopy facilities, and the broader endoscopy community. Routine and reliable measurement of data, facilitated by technology, is required to identify and drive improvements in care. Engaging all stakeholders in endoscopy quality improvement processes is crucial to enhancing patient outcomes and establishing best practices for safe, efficient, and effective pediatric endoscopic care.

Public Imaging Datasets of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy for Artificial Intelligence: a Review

With the advances in endoscopic technologies and artificial intelligence, a large number of endoscopic imaging datasets have been made public to researchers around the world. This study aims to review and introduce these datasets. An extensive literature search was conducted to identify appropriate datasets in PubMed, and other targeted searches were conducted in GitHub, Kaggle, and Simula to identify datasets directly. We provided a brief introduction to each dataset and evaluated the characteristics of the datasets included. Moreover, two national datasets in progress were discussed. A total of 40 datasets of endoscopic images were included, of which 34 were accessible for use. Basic and detailed information on each dataset was reported. Of all the datasets, 16 focus on polyps, and 6 focus on small bowel lesions. Most datasets (n = 16) were constructed by colonoscopy only, followed by normal gastrointestinal endoscopy and capsule endoscopy (n = 9). This review may facilitate the usage of public dataset resources in endoscopic research.

UK ERCP sedation practices, patient comfort and endoscopist characteristics: National Endoscopy Database (NED) analysis on behalf of the JAG and BSG

Objectives

This analysis assessed current endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) practice within the UK, including use of sedation and patient comfort.

Methods

ERCPs conducted over 1 year (1 July 2021-30 June 2022) and uploaded to the National Endoscopy Database (NED) were analysed. The endoscopist workforce was classified by gender and specialty, use of sedation was analysed. Logistic regression was used to assess associations between patient age, gender and procedure indications on moderate to severe discomfort risk.

Results

27 812 ERCPs were performed by 491 endoscopists in 175 sites and uploaded to NED, an estimated 50% of total UK activity. 13% were training procedures, 94% of the endoscopists were male, with 72% being gastroenterologists. Most ERCPs were performed under conscious sedation (89%). The discomfort rate among patients aged 60-90 undergoing ERCP under conscious sedation was 4.2% (95% CI 3.9% to 4.5%), with only 5.5% (95% CI 5.2% to 5.9%) receiving greater than 5 mg midazolam or 100 µg fentanyl.Younger patients (<30 years) had a higher discomfort risk during conscious sedation ERCPs than those aged 70-79 (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.2 to 4.3, p<0.05), while male patients had a lower discomfort risk compared with females (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.0, p=0.05).Enhanced sedation (propofol or general anaesthetic) was associated with lower frequency of discomfort (0.3%, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6) compared with conscious sedation (5.1%, 95% CI 4.9% to 5.4%, p<0.05).

Conclusions

Conscious sedation is well tolerated for most patients and prescribing practices have improved. However, triage of more patients, particularly young females, to enhanced sedation lists should be considered to reduce discomfort rates in future.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Joint Advisory Group (JAG) certification in endoscopy is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update standards for training and certification in flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS).

METHODS

A modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety representation from experts and trainees. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on FS training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer-reviewed by national stakeholders for incorporation into the JAG FS certification pathway.

RESULTS

In total, 41 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (17), assessment of competence (7) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (A) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (B) minimum procedure count ≥175; (C) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (D) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Lower gastrointestinal Endoscopy course; (E) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedural skill (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skill (SMSA level 1); (F) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool and (G) successful performance in summative DOPS.

CONCLUSION

The UK standards for training and certification in FS have been updated to support training, uphold standards in FS and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

In the UK, endoscopy certification is awarded when trainees attain minimum competency standards for independent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for colonoscopy training and certification.

METHODS

Under the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted between 2019 and 2020 with multisociety expert representation. Following literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations appraisal, recommendation statements on colonoscopy training and certification were formulated and subjected to anonymous voting to obtain consensus. Accepted statements were peer reviewed by JAG and relevant stakeholders for incorporation into the updated colonoscopy certification pathway.

RESULTS

In total, 45 recommendation statements were generated under the domains of: definition of competence (13), acquisition of competence (20), assessment of competence (8) and postcertification support (4). The consensus process led to revised criteria for colonoscopy certification, comprising: (1) achieving key performance indicators defined within British Society of Gastroenterology standards (ie, unassisted caecal intubation rate >90%, rectal retroversion >90%, polyp detection rate >15%+, polyp retrieval rate >90%, patient comfort <10% with moderate-severe discomfort); (2) minimum procedure count 280+; (3) performing 15+ procedures over the preceding 3 months; (4) attendance of the JAG Basic Skills in Colonoscopy course; (5) terminal ileal intubation rates of 60%+ in inflammatory bowel disease; (6) satisfying requirements for formative direct observation of procedure skills (DOPS) and direct observation of polypectomy skills (Size, Morphology, Site, Access (SMSA) level 2); (7) evidence of reflective practice as documented on the JAG Endoscopy Training System reflection tool; (8) successful performance in summative DOPS.

CONCLUSION

The UK standards for training and certification in colonoscopy have been updated, culminating in a single-stage certification process with emphasis on polypectomy competency (SMSA Level 2+). These standards are intended to support training, improve standards of colonoscopy and polypectomy, and provide support to the newly independent practitioner.

What is the current provision of service for gastrostomy insertion in England?

Background

Significant morbidity and mortality can be associated with gastrostomy insertion, likely influenced by patient selection, indication and aftercare. We aimed to establish what current variation in practice exists and how this has improved by comparison to our previously published British Society of Gastroenterology survey of 2010.

Methods

We approached all National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England (n=198). Email and web-based questionnaires were circulated. These data were correlated with the National Endoscopy Database (NED).

Results

The response rate was 69% (n=136/198). Estimated Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) placements in the UK are currently 6500 vs 17 000 in 2010 (p<0.01). There is a dedicated PEG consultant involved in 59% of the centres versus 30% in 2010 (p<0.001). Multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT) discussion occurs in 66% versus 40% in 2010 (p<0.05). Formal aftercare provision occurs in 83% versus 64% in 2010 (p<0.001). 74/107 respondents (69%) reported feeling pressurised to authorise a gastrostomy.

Conclusion

This national survey, validated by the results from NED, demonstrates a reduction of over 60% for PEG insertion rates compared with previous estimates. There has also been an increase in consultant involvement, MDT discussion and aftercare provision. However, two-third of responders described 'pressure' to insert a gastrostomy. Perhaps further efforts are needed to include and educate other specialty teams, patients and next of kin.

Trial protocol for COLO-DETECT: A randomized controlled trial of lesion detection comparing colonoscopy assisted by the GI Genius™ artificial intelligence endoscopy module with standard colonoscopy

AIM

Colorectal cancer is the second commonest cause of cancer death worldwide. Colonoscopy plays a key role in the control of colorectal cancer and, in that regard, maximizing detection (and removal) of pre-cancerous adenomas at colonoscopy is imperative. GI Genius™ (Medtronic Ltd) is a computer-aided detection system that integrates with existing endoscopy systems and improves adenoma detection during colonoscopy. COLO-DETECT aims to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of GI Genius™ in UK routine colonoscopy practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Participants will be recruited from patients attending for colonoscopy at National Health Service sites in England, for clinical symptoms, surveillance or within the national Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Randomization will involve a 1:1 allocation ratio (GI Genius™-assisted colonoscopy:standard colonoscopy) and will be stratified by age category (<60 years, 60-<74 years, ≥74 years), sex, hospital site and indication for colonoscopy. Demographic data, procedural data, histology and post-procedure patient experience and quality of life will be recorded. COLO-DETECT is designed and powered to detect clinically meaningful differences in mean adenomas per procedure and adenoma detection rate between GI Genius™-assisted colonoscopy and standard colonoscopy groups. The study will close when 1828 participants have had a complete colonoscopy. An economic evaluation will be conducted from the perspective of the National Health Service. A patient and public representative is contributing to all stages of the trial. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04723758) and ISRCTN (10451355). WHAT WILL THIS TRIAL ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: COLO-DETECT will be the first multi-centre randomized controlled trial evaluating GI Genius™ in real world colonoscopy practice and will, uniquely, evaluate both clinical and cost effectiveness.

The Efficacy of Senna Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The quality of bowel preparation is an extremely important determinant of colonoscopy results. However, the efficacy of senna regimens in improving bowel cleanliness is uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize data on whether using a senna bowel preparation regimen enhances the bowel cleanliness. We searched Web of Science Core Collection, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases (from the inception to August 2021). The primary efficacy outcome was bowel cleanliness. Secondary outcomes included patient compliance, tolerance, and adverse events. Eleven trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria (3,343 patients. Overall, we found no significant differences in bowel cleanliness between the senna regimen and other bowel preparation regimens (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.02 [0.63, 1.67], p = 0.93). There was significant difference in tolerance (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.66 [1.08, 2.54], p = .02) and compliance (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 3.05 [1.42, 6.55], p = .004). The senna regimen yielded a significantly greater proportion of no nausea (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.84 [1.45, 2.32]) and vomiting (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.65 [0.81, 3.35]). Compared with other bowel preparation regimens, the senna regimen may be effective and safe in bowel cleaning before colonoscopy, with superior compliance and tolerance.

Efficacy and Safety of Deep Sedation and Anaesthesia for Complex Endoscopic Procedures—A Narrative Review

Propofol sedation for advanced endoscopic procedures is a widespread technique at present, which generates controversy worldwide when anaesthetic or non-anaesthetic personnel administer this form of sedation. There is some evidence for safe administered propofol sedation by non-anaesthetic personnel in patients undergoing endoscopy procedures, but there are only few randomised trials addressing the safety and efficacy of propofol in patients undergoing advanced procedures. A serious possible consequence of propofol sedation is the rapid and unpredictable progression from deep sedation to general anaesthesia mostly when elderly and frail patients are involved in the diagnosis or treatment of various neoplasia. This situation requires rescue measures with skilled airway management. The aim of this paper is to review the safety and efficacy aspects of sedation techniques, with special reference to propofol administration covering the whole patient journey, including preassessment, sedation options and discharge when advanced endoscopic procedures are performed.

UK endoscopy workload and workforce patterns: is there potential to increase capacity? A BSG analysis of the National Endoscopy Database

Background

The lack of comprehensive national data on endoscopy activity and workforce hampers strategic planning. The National Endoscopy Database (NED) provides a unique opportunity to address this in the UK. We evaluated NED to inform service planning, exploring opportunities to expand capacity to meet service demands.

Design

Data on all procedures between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020 were extracted from NED. Endoscopy activity and endoscopist workforce were analysed.

Results

1 639 640 procedures were analysed (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) 693 663, colonoscopy 586 464, flexible sigmoidoscopy 335 439 and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography 23 074) from 407 sites by 4990 endoscopists. 89% of procedures were performed in NHS sites. 17% took place each weekday, 10% on Saturdays and 6% on Sundays. Training procedures accounted for 6% of total activity, over 99% of which took place in NHS sites. Median patient age was younger in the independent sector (IS) (51 vs 60 years, p<0.001). 74% of endoscopists were male. Gastroenterologists and surgeons each comprised one-third of the endoscopist workforce; non-medical endoscopists (NMEs) comprised 12% yet undertook 23% of procedures. Approximately half of endoscopists performing OGD (52%) or colonoscopies (48%) did not meet minimum annual procedure numbers.

Conclusion

This comprehensive analysis reveals endoscopy workload and workforce patterns for the first time across both the NHS and the IS in all four UK nations. Half of all endoscopists perform fewer than the recommended minimum annual procedure numbers: a national strategy to address this, along with expansion of the NME workforce, would increase endoscopy capacity, which could be used to exploit latent weekend capacity.

JAG consensus statements for training and certification in oesophagogastroduodenoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Training and quality assurance in oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) is important to ensure competent practice. A national evidence-based review was undertaken to update and develop standards and recommendations for OGD training and certification.

METHODS

Under the oversight of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG), a modified Delphi process was conducted with stakeholder representation from British Society of Gastroenterology, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, trainees and trainers. Recommendations on OGD training and certification were formulated following literature review and appraised using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. These were subjected to electronic voting to achieve consensus. Accepted statements were incorporated into the updated certification pathway.

RESULTS

In total, 32 recommendation statements were generated for the following domains: definition of competence (4 statements), acquisition of competence (12 statements), assessment of competence (10 statements) and post-certification support (6 statements). The consensus process led to following certification criteria: (1) performing ≥250 hands-on procedures; (2) attending a JAG-accredited basic skills course; (3) attainment of relevant minimal performance standards defined by British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, (4) achieving physically unassisted D2 intubation and J-manoeuvre in ≥95% of recent procedures, (5) satisfactory performance in formative and summative direct observation of procedural skills assessments.

CONCLUSION

The JAG standards for diagnostic OGD have been updated following evidence-based consensus. These standards are intended to support training, improve competency assessment to uphold standards of practice and provide support to the newly-independent practitioner.

THE ESOPHAGEAL, GASTRIC, AND COLORECTAL TUMORS AND THE ESOPHAGOGASTRODUODENOSCOPIES AND COLONOSCOPIES BY THE BRAZILIAN UNIFIED HEALTH SYSTEM: WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE?

Esophagogastroduodenoscopies and colonoscopies are the main diagnostic examinations for esophageal, stomach, and colorectal tumors.

Power of big data to improve patient care in gastroenterology

Big data is defined as being large, varied or frequently updated, and usually generated from real-world interaction. With the unprecedented availability of big data, comes an obligation to maximise its potential for healthcare improvements in treatment effectiveness, disease prevention and healthcare delivery. We review the opportunities and challenges that big data brings to gastroenterology. We review its sources for healthcare improvement in gastroenterology, including electronic medical records, patient registries and patient-generated data. Big data can complement traditional research methods in hypothesis generation, supporting studies and disseminating findings; and in some cases holds distinct advantages where traditional trials are unfeasible. There is great potential power in patient-level linkage of datasets to help quantify inequalities, identify best practice and improve patient outcomes. We exemplify this with the UK colorectal cancer repository and the potential of linkage using the National Endoscopy Database, the inflammatory bowel disease registry and the National Health Service bowel cancer screening programme. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are increasingly being used to improve diagnostics in gastroenterology, with image analysis entering clinical practice, and the potential of machine learning to improve outcome prediction and diagnostics in other clinical areas. Big data brings issues with large sample sizes, real-world biases, data curation, keeping clinical context at analysis and General Data Protection Regulation compliance. There is a tension between our obligation to use data for the common good and protecting individual patient's data. We emphasise the importance of engaging with our patients to enable them to understand their data usage as fully as they wish.

Impact of the National Endoscopy Database (NED) on colonoscopy withdrawal time: a tertiary centre experience

OBJECTIVE

Colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) is a key performance indicator affecting polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, studies have shown wide variation in CWT and ADR between different endoscopists. The National Endoscopy Database (NED) was implemented to enable quality assurance in all endoscopy units across the UK and also to reduce variation in practice. We aimed to assess whether CWT changed since the introduction of NED and whether CWT affected PDR.

METHODS

We used NED to retrospectively collect data regarding CWT and PDR of 25 endoscopists who performed (n=4459 colonoscopies) in the four quarters of 2019. We then compared this data to their performance in 2016, before using NED (n=4324 colonoscopies).

RESULTS

Mean CWT increased from 7.66 min in 2016 to 9.25 min in 2019 (p=0.0001). Mean PDR in the two periods was 29.9% and 28.3% (p=0.64). 72% of endoscopists (18/25) had CWT>6 min in 2016 versus 100% (25/25) in 2019, the longer CWT in 2019 positively correlated with the PDR (r=0.50, p=0.01). Gastroenterology consultants and trainee endoscopists had longer CWT compared with colorectal surgeons both before and after using NED.

CONCLUSION

NED usage increased withdrawal times in colonoscopy. Longer withdrawal times were associated with higher PDR. A national colonoscopy audit using data from NED is required to evaluate whether wide variations in practice across endoscopy units in the UK still exist and to ensure minimum colonoscopy quality standards are achieved.

A Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Control System Incorporated With Deep Learning Improved Endoscopist Performance in a Pretest and Post-Test Trial

INTRODUCTION

Gastrointestinal endoscopic quality is operator-dependent. To ensure the endoscopy quality, we constructed an endoscopic audit and feedback system named Endo.Adm and evaluated its effect in a form of pretest and posttest trial.

METHODS

Endo.Adm system was developed using Python and Deep Convolutional Neural Ne2rk models. Sixteen endoscopists were recruited from Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University and were randomly assigned to undergo feedback of Endo.Adm or not (8 for the feedback group and 8 for the control group). The feedback group received weekly quality report cards which were automatically generated by Endo.Adm. We then compared the adenoma detection rate (ADR) and gastric precancerous conditions detection rate between baseline and postintervention phase for endoscopists in each group to evaluate the impact of Endo.Adm feedback. In total, 1,191 colonoscopies and 3,515 gastroscopies were included for analysis.

RESULTS

ADR was increased after Endo.Adm feedback (10.8%-20.3%, P < 0.01,

DISCUSSION

Endo.Adm feedback contributed to multifaceted gastrointestinal endoscopic quality improvement. This system is practical to implement and may serve as a standard model for quality improvement in routine work (http://www.chictr.org.cn/, ChiCTR1900024153).

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adenoma/diagnostic imaging
• Adenoma/epidemiology
• Adult
• China
• Clinical Competence
• Colonoscopy/standards
• Deep Learning
• Early Detection of Cancer
• Feedback
• Female
• Humans
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Quality Improvement
• Quality Indicators, Health Care/statistics & numerical data
• Risk Factors

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Liwen Yao Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Jun Liu Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Lianlian Wu Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Lihui Zhang Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Xiao Hu Wuhan ENDOANGEL Medical Technology Company, Wuhan, China;
Jinzhu Liu Wuhan ENDOANGEL Medical Technology Company, Wuhan, China;
Zihua Lu Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Dexin Gong Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Ping An Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Jun Zhang Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Guiying Hu Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Di Chen Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Renquan Luo Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;
Shan Hu Wuhan ENDOANGEL Medical Technology Company, Wuhan, China;
Yanning Yang Department of Ophthalmology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Honggang Yu Department of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Key Laboratory of Hubei Province for Digestive System Disease, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Hubei Provincial Clinical Research Center for Digestive Disease Minimally Invasive Incision, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China;

Collapse

Predicting endoscopic activity recovery in England after COVID-19: a national analysis

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a substantial reduction in gastrointestinal endoscopies, creating a backlog of procedures. We aimed to quantify this backlog nationally for England and assess how various interventions might mitigate the backlog.

Methods

We did a national analysis of data for colonoscopies, flexible sigmoidoscopies, and gastroscopies from National Health Service (NHS) trusts in NHS England's Monthly Diagnostic Waiting Times and Activity dataset. Trusts were excluded if monthly data were incomplete. To estimate the potential backlog, we used linear logistic regression to project the cumulative deficit between actual procedures performed and expected procedures, based on historical pre-pandemic trends. We then made further estimations of the change to the backlog under three scenarios: recovery to a set level of capacity, ranging from 90% to 130%; further disruption to activity (eg, second pandemic wave); or introduction of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) triaging.

Findings

We included data from Jan 1, 2018, to Oct 31, 2020, from 125 NHS trusts. 10 476 endoscopy procedures were done in April, 2020, representing 9·5% of those done in April, 2019 (n=110 584), before recovering to 105 716 by October, 2020 (84·5% of those done in October, 2019 [n=125 072]). Recovering to 100% capacity on the current trajectory would lead to a projected backlog of 162 735 (95% CI 143 775–181 695) colonoscopies, 119 025 (107 398–130 651) flexible sigmoidoscopies, and 194 087 (172 564–215 611) gastroscopies in January, 2021, attributable to the pandemic. Increasing capacity to 130% would still take up to June, 2022, to eliminate the backlog. A further 2-month interruption would add an extra 15·4%, a 4-month interruption would add an extra 43·8%, and a 6-month interruption would add an extra 82·5% to the potential backlog. FIT triaging of cases that are found to have greater than 10 μg haemoglobin per g would reduce colonoscopy referrals to around 75% of usual levels, with the backlog cleared in early 2022.

Interpretation

Our work highlights the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy services nationally. Even with mitigation measures, it could take much longer than a year to eliminate the pandemic-related backlog. Urgent action is required by key stakeholders (ie, individual NHS trusts, Clinical Commissioning Groups, British Society of Gastroenterology, and NHS England) to tackle the backlog and prevent delays to patient management.

Funding

Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS) at University College London, National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, and DATA-CAN, Health Data Research UK.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK endoscopic activity and cancer detection: a National Endoscopy Database Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major global impact on endoscopic services. This reduced capacity, along with public reluctance to undergo endoscopy during the pandemic, might result in excess mortality from delayed cancer diagnosis. Using the UK's National Endoscopy Database (NED), we performed the first national analysis of the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy services and endoscopic cancer diagnosis.

DESIGN

We developed a NED COVID-19 module incorporating procedure-level data on all endoscopic procedures. Three periods were designated: pre-COVID (6 January 2020 to 15 March), transition (16-22 March) and COVID-impacted (23 March-31 May). National, regional and procedure-specific analyses were performed. The average weekly number of cancers, proportion of missing cancers and cancer detection rates were calculated.

RESULTS

A weekly average of 35 478 endoscopy procedures were performed in the pre-COVID period. Activity in the COVID-impacted period reduced to 12% of pre-COVID levels; at its low point, activity was only 5%, recovering to 20% of pre-COVID activity by study end. Although more selective vetting significantly increased the per-procedure cancer detection rate (pre-COVID 1.91%; COVID-impacted 6.61%; p<0.001), the weekly number of cancers detected decreased by 58%. The proportion of missing cancers ranged from 19% (pancreatobiliary) to 72% (colorectal).

CONCLUSION

This national analysis demonstrates the remarkable impact that the pandemic has had on endoscopic services, which has resulted in a substantial and concerning reduction in cancer detection. Major, urgent efforts are required to restore endoscopy capacity to prevent an impending cancer healthcare crisis.

Overcoming the barriers to dissemination and implementation of quality measures for gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology (UEG) position statement

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has developed performance measures and established a framework for quality assessment for gastrointestinal endoscopy in Europe. Most national societies actively undertake initiatives to implement and explicitly endorse these quality indicators. Given this, the ESGE proposes that, at a national level, strong leadership should exist to disseminate and implement quality parameters. Thus, understanding the potential barriers that may vary locally is of paramount importance. The ESGE suggests that each national society should prioritise quality and standards of care in gastrointestinal endoscopy in their activities and should survey/understand which measures area local priority to their members and make measuring quality intrinsic to daily endoscopy practice.

Overcoming the barriers to dissemination and implementation of quality measures for gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology (UEG) position statement

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has developed performance measures and established a framework for quality assessment for gastrointestinal endoscopy in Europe. Most national societies actively undertake initiatives to implement and explicitly endorse these quality indicators. Given this, ESGE proposes that, at a national level, strong leadership should exist to disseminate and implement quality parameters. Thus, understanding the potential barriers that may vary locally is of paramount importance. ESGE suggests that each national society should prioritize quality and standards of care in gastrointestinal endoscopy in their activities and should survey/understand which measures are a local priority to their members and make measuring quality intrinsic to daily endoscopy practice.

Development of an automated ERCP Quality Report Card using structured data fields

Background and aims

Measuring adherence to ERCP quality indicators (QIs) is confounded by variability in indications, maneuvers, and documentation styles. We hypothesized that incorporation of mandatory, structured data fields within reporting software would permit accurate measurement of QI adherence rates and facilitate generation of a provider ERCP report card.

Methods

At two referral centers, endoscopy documentation software was modified to generate provider alerts prior to finalizing the note. The alerts reminded the provider to document the following components in a standardized manner: indication, altered anatomy, prior interventions, and QIs deemed high priority by society consensus, study authors, or both. Adherence rates for each QI were calculated in aggregate and by provider via data extraction directly from the procedure documentation software. Medical records were reviewed manually to measure the accuracy of automated data extraction. Accuracy of automated measurement for each QI was calculated against results derived by manual review.

Results

During the 9-month study period, 1,376 ERCP procedures were completed by 8 providers. Manual medical record review confirmed high (98-100%) accuracy of automatic extraction of ERCP QIs from the endoscopy report, including cannulation rate of the native papilla and complete extraction of common bile duct stones. An ERCP report card was generated, allowing for individual comparison of adherence to ERCP QIs with colleagues at their institution and others.

Conclusion

In this pilot study, use of mandatory, structured data fields within clinical ERCP reports permit the accurate measurement of high priority ERCP QIs and the subsequent generation of interval report cards.

Can adjuncts to bowel preparation for colonoscopy improve patient experience and result in superior bowel cleanliness? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bowel preparation for colonoscopy is often poorly tolerated due to poor palatability and adverse effects. This can negatively impact on the patient experience and on the quality of bowel preparation. This systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to assess whether adjuncts to bowel preparation affected palatability, tolerability and quality of bowel preparation (bowel cleanliness).

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify studies evaluating adjunct use for colonoscopic bowel preparation. Studies comparing different regimens and volumes were excluded. Specific outcomes studied included palatability (taste), willingness to repeat bowel preparation, gastrointestinal adverse events and the quality of bowel preparation. Data across studies were pooled using a random-effects model and heterogeneity assessed using I2-statistics.

RESULTS

Of 467 studies screened, six were included for analysis (all single-blind randomised trials; n = 1187 patients). Adjuncts comprised citrus reticulata peel, orange juice, menthol candy drops, simethicone, Coke Zero and sugar-free chewing gum. Overall, adjunct use was associated with improved palatability (mean difference 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.96, p < 0.001) on a scale of 0-5, acceptability of taste (odds ratio 2.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.52-4.95, p < 0.001) and willingness to repeat bowel preparation (odds ratio 2.92, 95% confidence interval: 1.97-4.35, p < 0.001). Patients in the adjunct group reported lower rates of bloating (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.77, p = 0.003) and vomiting (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.81, p = 0.007), but no difference in nausea (p = 0.10) or abdominal pain (p = 0.62). Adjunct use resulted in superior bowel cleanliness (odds ratio 2.52, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.85, p = 0.006). Heterogeneity varied across outcomes, ranging from 0% (vomiting) to 81% (palatability), without evidence of publication bias. The overall quality of evidence was rated moderate.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis, the use of adjuncts was associated with better palatability, less vomiting and bloating, willingness to repeat bowel preparation and superior quality of bowel preparation. The addition of adjuncts to bowel preparation may improve outcomes of colonoscopy and the overall patient experience.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: age-related malignancy detection rates at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Age is an important and objective risk factor for upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy. The accuracy of various age limits to detect upper GI malignancy is unclear. Determination of this accuracy may aid in the decision to refer symptomatic patients for upper GI endoscopy. The aim of this analysis was to synthesize data on upper GI malignancy detection rates for various age limits worldwide through meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science in November 2018. Selection criteria included studies addressing malignant findings at upper GI endoscopy in a symptomatic population reporting age at time of diagnosis. Meta-analyses were conducted to derive continent-specific cancer detection rates.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies including 346,641 patients across 21 countries fulfilled the inclusion criteria. To detect >80% of malignant cases all symptomatic patients over 40 years of age should be investigated in Africa, over 50 years of age in South America and Asia, and over 55 years of age in North America and Europe.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis provides data on intercontinental variation in age at time of upper GI malignancy diagnosis in symptomatic patients referred for upper GI endoscopy. Guideline recommendations for age-based selection should be tailored to local age-related detection rates.

The National Endoscopy Database (NED) Automated Performance Reports to Improve Quality Outcomes Trial (APRIQOT) randomized controlled trial design

Background and study aims  Colonoscopists with low polyp detection have higher post colonoscopy colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates. The United Kingdom's National Endoscopy Database (NED) automatically captures patient level data in real time and provides endoscopy key performance indicators (KPI) at a national, endoscopy center, and individual level. Using an electronic behavior change intervention, the primary objective of this study is to assess if automated feedback of endoscopist and endoscopy center-level optimal procedure-adjusted detection KPI (opadKPI) improves polyp detection performance. Methods  This multicenter, prospective, cluster-randomized controlled trial is randomizing NHS endoscopy centres to either intervention or control. The intervention is targeted at independent colonoscopists and each center's endoscopy lead. The intervention reports are evidence-based from endoscopist qualitative interviews and informed by psychological theories of behavior. NED automatically creates monthly reports providing an opadKPI, using mean number of polyps, and an action plan. The primary outcome is opadKPI comparing endoscopists in intervention and control centers at 9 months. Secondary outcomes include other KPI and proximal detection measures at 9 and 12 months. A nested histological validation study will correlate opadKPI to adenoma detection rate at the center level. A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis will be undertaken. Conclusion  If the intervention is efficacious and cost-effective, we will showcase the potential of this learning health system, which can be implemented at local and national levels to improve colonoscopy quality, and demonstrate that an automated system that collects, analyses, and disseminates real-time clinical data can deliver evidence- and theory-informed feedback.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Causes and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a healthcare burden and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We aim to describe the presentation, clinical, and laboratory characteristics of patients presenting with UGIB as well as important patient outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study performed at a tertiary care university hospital in Riyadh. Electronic endoscopic reports of patients undergoing gastroscopies for the indication of UGIB from January 2006 to January 2015 were included. Demographic data, past medical conditions, medications used, symptoms on presentation, as well as the patients' hemodynamic status, laboratory investigations on presentations, the need for blood products, the need for admission to an intensive care unit, rebleeding, and in-hospital mortality rates were retrieved from medical records.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-nine patients were included with a mean age of 57.1 years and males constituted 66.8% of the study cohort. At least one comorbidity was present in 88.2%, while 20.7% had a history of prior UGIB, 12.6% had a history of peptic ulcer disease, and 9.2% had known esophageal varices. A nonvariceal source represented 80.1% of the causes (95% CI: 75.4 to 85.3%), 15.5% required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), the rebleeding rate was 8.9% (95% CI; 5.7% to 12.2%) while the in-hospital mortality was 4.4% (95% CI; 2.4% to 6.9%). The mean pre-endoscopic Rockall score was 2.6 (range: 0 to 5), while the total Rockall score was 4.4 (range: 1 to 9). There was no association between the pre-endoscopic Rockall score and rebleeding (3.0 vs. 2.5, P = 0.27) or need for ICU admission (3.2 vs. 2.4, P = 0.08), the total Rockall score and rebleeding (5.0 vs. 4.4, P = 0.58) or need for ICU admission (5.0 vs. 4.3, P = 0.36).

CONCLUSION

Causes of UGIB in this patient population were predominantly nonvariceal and the rebleeding and mortality rates resembled those of other studies.

JAG/BSG national survey of UK endoscopy services: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and early restoration of endoscopy services

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected UK endoscopy workload. The Joint Advisory Group on GI endoscopy and British Society of Gastroenterology issued guidelines on endoscopy service delivery changes and restoration. We surveyed UK endoscopy clinical leads to gain insights into service restoration.

METHODS

A Google Forms-designed survey, assessing endoscopy provision, Covid minimisation and referral pathways was circulated to all UK endoscopy leads. The survey was open between 19 and 24 May 2020.

RESULTS

97 endoscopy leads completed the survey, with all UK nations and regions represented. Analysis showed 20% of endoscopy services were not providing endoscopy. Workload limitations were due to enforced interprocedural downtime (92%; with some services enforcing >1-hour downtime between procedures), social distancing (88%) and working in personal protective equipment (PPE) (87%). 91% of services reported a referral backlog (urgent median 2 months, routine median 6 months). 96% of services reported no current problems accessing PPE. Level 1/2 PPE use in colonoscopy was not uniform. 63% of services routinely swab patients for COVID-19 before endoscopy, 88% of services do not routinely swab asymptomatic staff. Comments addressed reducing endoscopy demand through vetting and changing referral criteria, the mostly commonly cited strategy being increased faecal immunochemical testing in symptomatic patients (70% of services).

CONCLUSION

This survey demonstrates the pandemic's profound impact on UK endoscopy. Challenges include standardising Covid-minimisation strategies and recovering staffing levels. To improve endoscopy services, there is a need to refine referral pathways, improve vetting and clarify guidance on downtime and PPE within endoscopy.

National census of UK endoscopy services in 2019

INTRODUCTION

The 2017 Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy (JAG) census highlighted the pressure endoscopy services were under in meeting national targets and the factors behind this. In 2019, JAG conducted a further national census of endoscopy services to understand trends in activity, workforce and waiting time targets.

METHODS

In April 2019, the census was sent to all eligible JAG-registered services. Collated data were analysed through various statistical methods. A further comparative dataset was created using available submissions from the 2017 census matched to services in the current census.

RESULTS

There was a 68% response rate (322/471). There has been a 12%-15% increase in activity across all GI procedures with largest increases in bowel cancer screening. Fewer services are meeting waiting time targets compared with 2017, with endoscopist, nursing and physical capacity cited as the main reasons. Services are striving to improve capacity: 80% of services have an agreed business plan to meet capacity and the number using insourcing has increased from 13% to 20%. The workforce has increased, with endoscopist numbers increasing by 15%, nurses and allied health professionals by 14% and clerical staff by 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2019 JAG census is the most recent and extensive survey of UK endoscopy services. There is a clear trend of increasing activity with fewer services able to meet national waiting time targets than 2 years ago. Services have increased their workforce and improved planning to stem the tide but there remains a continued pressure to deliver high quality, safe endoscopy. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, JAG recognises that these pressures will be severely exacerbated and waiting time targets for accreditation will need adjustment and tolerance during the evolution and recovery from the pandemic.

Impact of a national basic skills in colonoscopy course on trainee performance: An interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

The Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy basic skills in colonoscopy (BSC) course was introduced in 2009 to improve colonoscopy training within the United Kingdom, but its impact on trainee performance is unknown.

AIM

To assess whether attendance of the BSC could improve colonoscopy performance.

METHODS

Trainees awarded colonoscopy certification between 2011-2016 were stratified into 3 groups according to pre-course procedure count (< 70, 70-140 and > 140). Study outcomes, comprising the unassisted caecal intubation rate (CIR) and the performance indicator of colonic intubation (PICI), were studied over the 50 procedures pre and post- course. Interrupted time series analyses were performed to detect step-change changes attributable to the course.

RESULTS

A total of 369 trainees with pre-course procedure counts of < 70 (n = 118), 70-140 (n = 121) and > 140 (n = 130) were included. Over the 50 pre-course procedures, significant linear improvements in CIR were found, with average increases of 4.2, 3.6 and 1.7 percentage points (pp) per 10 procedures performed in the < 70, 70-140 and > 140 groups respectively (all P < 0.001). The < 70 procedures group saw a significant step-change improvement in CIR, increasing from 46% in the last pre-course procedure, to 51% in the first procedure post-course (P = 0.005). The CIR step-change was not significant in the 70-140 (68% to 71%; P = 0.239) or > 140 (86% to 87%; P = 0.354) groups. For PICI, significant step-change improvements were seen in all three groups, with average increases of 5.6 pp (P < 0.001), 5.4 pp (P = 0.003) and 3.9 pp (P = 0.014) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Attendance of the BSC was associated with a significant step-change improvement in PICI, regardless of prior procedural experience. However, CIR data suggest that the optimal timing of course attendance appears to be at earlier stages of training (< 70 procedures).