Adherence to Surveillance Guidelines after the Removal of Colorectal Polyps: A Multinational, Multicenter, Prospective Survey

The Effect of Intervention for Improving Colonoscopy Quality Is Associated with the Personality Traits of Endoscopists

Background/Aims

This study investigated whether the personality traits of endoscopists are associated with the effect of interventions for the improvement of colonoscopy quality.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter, single-blind study was performed with 13 endoscopists in three health screening centers over a 12-month period. Quality indicators (QIs), including adenoma detection rate (ADR), polyp detection rate (PDR), and withdrawal time, were measured every 3 months. Consecutive interventions for the improvement of colonoscopy quality were conducted every 3 months, which included the personal notification of QIs, the in-group notification of QIs, and finally a targeted "quality education" session. The personality traits of each endoscopist were evaluated for perfectionism, fear of negative evaluation, and cognitive flexibility after the last QI assessment.

Results

A total of 4,095 colonoscopies were evaluated to measure the QIs of the individual endoscopists for 12 months. The mean ADR, PDR, and withdrawal time of the 13 endoscopists were 32.3%, 47.7%, and 394 seconds at baseline and increased to 39.0%, 55.1%, and 430 seconds by the end of the study (p=0.003, p=0.006, and p=0.004, respectively). Among the three interventions, only quality education significantly improved QIs: ADR, 36.0% to 39.0% (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.63). The improvement of ADR and PDR by education was significantly associated with perfectionism (r=0.617, p=0.033 and r=0.635, p=0.027, respectively) and fear of negative evaluation (r=0.704, p=0.011 and r=0.761, p=0.004, respectively).

Conclusions

Education can improve colonoscopy quality, and its effect size is associated with an endoscopist's personal traits such as perfectionism and fear of negative evaluation (Clinical-Trials.gov Registry NCT03796169).

What are the priority quality indicators for colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice?

Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator-dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high-quality screening colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit-based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow-up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high-quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.

Development and Evaluation of a Surveillance System for Follow-Up After Colorectal Polypectomy

Importance

The adherence of physicians and patients to published colorectal postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines varies greatly, and patient follow-up is critical but time consuming.

Objectives

To evaluate the accuracy of an automatic surveillance (AS) system in identifying patients after polypectomy, assigning surveillance intervals for different risks of patients, and proactively following up with patients on time.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this diagnostic/prognostic study, endoscopic and pathological reports of 47 544 patients undergoing colonoscopy at 3 hospitals between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022, were collected to develop an AS system based on natural language processing. The performance of the AS system was fully evaluated in internal and external tests according to 5 guidelines worldwide and compared with that of physicians. A multireader, multicase (MRMC) trial was conducted to evaluate use of the AS system and physician guideline adherence, and prospective data were collected to evaluate the success rate in contacting patients and the association with reduced human workload. Data analysis was conducted from July to September 2022.

Exposures

Assistance of the AS system.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The accuracy of the system in identifying patients after polypectomy, stratifying patient risk levels, and assigning surveillance intervals in internal (Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University), external 1 (Wenzhou Central Hospital), and external 2 (The First People's Hospital of Yichang) test sets; the accuracy of physicians and their time burden with and without system assistance; and the rate of successfully informed patients of the system were evaluated.

Results

Test sets for 16 106 patients undergoing colonoscopy (mean [SD] age, 51.90 [13.40] years; 7690 females [47.75%]) were evaluated. In internal, external 1, and external 2 test sets, the system had an overall accuracy of 99.91% (95% CI, 99.83%-99.95%), 99.54% (95% CI, 99.30%-99.70%), and 99.77% (95% CI, 99.41%-99.91%), respectively, for identifying types of patients and achieved an overall accuracy of at least 99.30% (95% CI, 98.67%-99.63%) in the internal test set, 98.89% (95% CI, 98.33%-99.27%) in external test set 1, and 98.56% (95% CI, 95.86%-99.51%) in external test set 2 for stratifying patient risk levels and assigning surveillance intervals according to 5 guidelines. The system was associated with increased mean (SD) accuracy among physicians vs no AS system in 105 patients (98.67% [1.28%] vs 78.10% [18.01%]; P = .04) in the MRMC trial. In a prospective trial, the AS system successfully informed 82 of 88 patients (93.18%) and was associated with reduced burden of follow-up time vs no AS system (0 vs 2.86 h).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that an AS system was associated with improved adherence to guidelines among physicians and reduced workload among physicians and nurses.

Real-world compliance with the 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer polypectomy surveillance guidelines: an observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Overuse of screening colonoscopy increases cost and procedural adverse events, but inadequate surveillance can miss the development of colorectal cancer. We measured compliance with the 2020 U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (USMSTF) polypectomy surveillance guidelines in clinical records and a survey.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study comparing surveillance intervals for first-time average-risk colonoscopies with the 2020 USMSTF guidelines. Cases were analyzed from 3 intervals (March 2021 to May 2021, November 2021 to January 2022, and April 2022 to May 2022), collectively termed the postguideline period, and a baseline period from November 2019 to January 2020. Real-world compliance rates were compared with results of a survey conducted between November 2020 and February 2021.

RESULTS

Overall compliance was 48.9% among 532 colonoscopies, ranging from 8.3% for low-risk adenomas (LRAs), 88.3% for high-risk adenomas, 63.1% for sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), and 88.6% for hyperplastic polyps. Compliance for LRA increased from the baseline period (.8% vs 8.3%, P = .003), and 95.3% of nonadherent LRA cases followed the 2012 USMSTF guidelines. Compliance for LRAs was 18.6% among respondents who provided a compliant surveillance interval for LRAs in the survey. Noncompliance was associated with finishing training >10 years ago (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.7) and performing over 800 colonoscopies annually (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of the 2020 USMSTF surveillance guidelines remains low at 2 years. Further research into outcomes for patients with LRAs and SSPs may increase guideline adoption.

Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance

The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.