Trends in quality of screening colonoscopy in Austria

Background and study aim: Screening colonoscopy only effectively prevents colorectal cancer if performed with high quality. The aim of this study was to analyze the detection rates of premalignant colorectal lesions in screening colonoscopies performed within a nationwide quality control program for screening colonoscopy in Austria.

Methods: Data from electronic records of the screening program from its implementation in 2007 until December 2014 were analyzed in order to calculate detection rates for adenomas, advanced adenomas, polyps, and proximal lesions, and rates of cecal intubation, sedation, complications, and adequate bowel preparation. Results were evaluated to identify trends and changes in quality parameters over the 8-year study period.

Results: During the study period, 301 endoscopists provided data from 159 246 screening colonoscopies. Mean age of screened individuals was 61.1 years, and 49.1 % were women. Significant increases over time were found for age- and sex-adjusted adenoma detection rates (ADRs), which increased from a mean of 22.2 % (SD 10.7 %) in 2007/2008 to 24.2 % (SD 11.6 %) in 2013/2014. On average, each endoscopist increased their individual ADR by + 1.5 percentage points per 2-year period (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.9 – 2.2 percentage points; P < 0.01). Similarly, detection rates for proximal lesions rose from 15.8 % (SD 9.8 %) to 21.7 % (SD 13.3 %  + 2.5 percentage points per 2-year period, 95 %CI 1.9 – 3.1 percentage points; P < 0.01). ADR in men increased from 27.6 % in 2007/2008 (SD 11.1 %) to 29.2 % in 2013/2014 (SD 12.7 %; P < 0.01); ADR in women increased from 14.2 % (SD 7.1 %) in 2007/2008 to 19.0 % (SD 10.5 %) in 2013/2014 (P < 0.01). Advanced adenoma detection rates decreased during the study period, from 11.4 % (SD 9.0 %) in 2007/2008 to 7.6 % (SD 5.4 %) in 2013/2014 (P = 0.06) in men, and from 5.5 % (SD 5.3 %) in 2007/2008 to 4.0 % (SD 4.1 %) in 2013/2014 in women (P = 0.21).

Conclusions: This study showed an improvement in the quality of screening colonoscopies performed within a quality assurance program in Austria between 2007 and 2014. Although, overall ADR increased significantly during the study period, there was a decrease in the rate of advanced adenoma detection.

• References

• 1 Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O’Brien MJ et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 687-696
• 2 Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1977-1981
• 3 Altobelli E, Lattanzi A, Paduano R et al. Colorectal cancer prevention in Europe: burden of disease and status of screening programs. Prev Med 2014; 62: 132-141
• 4 Jover R, Herraiz M, Alarcon O et al. Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 444-451
• 5 Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 16-28
• 6 Rex DK, Bond JH, Winawer S et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroentoerl 2002; 97: 1296-1308
• 7 Segnan N, Patnick J, von Karsa L et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis – first edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2010 Available at: http://www.kolorektum.cz/res/file/guidelines/CRC-screening-guidelines-EC-2011-02-03.pdf Accessed: 11 July 2016
• 8 Regula J, Rupinski M, Kraszewska E et al. Colonoscopy in colorectal-cancer screening for detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 1863-1872
• 9 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 10 Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 1298-1306
• 11 Ferlitsch M, Reinhart K, Pramhas S et al. Sex-specific prevalence of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and colorectal cancer in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. JAMA 2011; 306: 1352-1358
• 12 Bannert C, Reinhart K, Dunkler D et al. Sedation in screening colonoscopy: impact on quality indicators and complications. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1837-1848
• 13 Reinhart K, Bannert C, Dunkler D et al. Prevalence of flat lesions in a large screening population and their role in colonoscopy quality improvement. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 350-356
• 14 Waldmann E, Britto-Arias M, Gessl I et al. Endoscopists with low adenoma detection rates benefit from high-definition endoscopy. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 466-473
• 15 Ferlitsch M, Heinze G, Salzl P et al. Sex is a stronger predictor of colorectal adenoma and advanced adenoma than fecal occult blood test. Med Oncol 2014; 31: 151
• 16 Jeschek P, Ferlitsch A, Salzl P et al. A greater proportion of liver transplant candidates have colorectal neoplasia than in the healthy screening population. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 956-962
• 17 Kozbial K, Reinhart K, Heinze G et al. High quality of screening colonoscopy in Austria is not dependent on endoscopist specialty or setting. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 207-216
• 18 Stock C, Brenner H. Utilization of lower gastrointestinal endoscopy and fecal occult blood test in 11 European countries: evidence from the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Endoscopy 2010; 42: 546-556
• 19 Bowles CJ, Leicester R, Romaya C et al. A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?. Gut 2004; 53: 277-283
• 20 British Society of Gastroenterology. Endoscopy Global rating Scale. Available from: http://www.bsg.org.uk/clinical-guidance/endoscopy/endoscopy-global-rating-scale.html Accessed 11 July 2016
• 21 Chilton A, Rutter M. Quality assurance guidelines for colonoscopy. Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes. 2011 Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/427591/nhsbcsp06.pdf Accessed: 11 July 2016
• 22 Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT et al. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2013; 62: 242-249
• 23 Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 31-53
• 24 Brenner H, Altenhofen L, Kretschmann J et al. Trends in adenoma detection rates during the first 10 years of the German Screening Colonocopy Program. Gastroenterology 2015; 149: 356-366
• 25 Kahi CJ, Ballard D, Shah AS et al. Impact of a quarterly report card on colonoscopy quality measures. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 925-931
• 26 Coe SG, Crook JE, Diehl NN et al. An endoscopic quality improvement program improves detection of colorectal adenomas. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 219-226
• 27 Pox CP, Altenhofen L, Brenner H et al. Efficacy of a nationwide screening colonoscopy program for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 1460-1467
• 28 Anderson BW, Smyrk TC, Anderson KS et al. Endoscopic overestimation of colorectal polyp size. Gastrointest Endoc 2016; 83: 201-208
• 29 Barclay RL, Vicari JJ, Doughty AS et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2533-2541
• 30 European Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Working Group. von Karsa L, Patnick J et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis: overview and introduction to the full supplement publication. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 51-59