Judgement of the quality of bowel preparation at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with variability in adenoma detection rates
- PMID: 16767579
- DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-925259
Judgement of the quality of bowel preparation at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with variability in adenoma detection rates
Abstract
Background and study aims: Adenoma detection rates (ADRs) at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy are known to vary between endoscopists. Variability in the technique used and in the quality of bowel preparation may explain this. The aim of this study was to establish whether there is a relationship between the grading of bowel preparation and the ADR.
Materials and methods: The relationship between the ADR and assessment of bowel preparation was examined using the full United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening Trial data set (n = 38 601). The consistency of the bowel preparation classification was then investigated by six experienced endoscopists (video scorers), who examined 260 flexible sigmoidoscopy cases - 20 from each of the 13 trial endoscopists.
Results: Overall, the ADR was significantly higher in flexible sigmoidoscopy examinations with excellent or good bowel preparation ( P = 0.02). However, endoscopists with a higher ADR coded a smaller proportion of their examinations as having excellent/good preparation ( P = 0.002). Video scorers agreed with the trial endoscopists' definition of bowel preparation in 48.9 % of the readings, but they scored the quality of preparation as poorer than the trial endoscopists in 36.4 % and 40.6 %, respectively, in the intermediate-performance group (10 % < ADR < 14 %) and lower-performance group (ADR </= 10 %) in comparison with only 12.9 % in the high-performance group (ADR > or =14 %). There was a significant linear trend between the proportion scored as having poor bowel preparation and the ADR ( P < 0.001), varying from 2.7 % in the higher-performance ADR group to 13.4 % in the lower-performance group.
Conclusions: Endoscopists with a higher ADR are more likely to be critical of the quality of bowel preparation. Training in judgement processes such as non-acceptance of suboptimal bowel preparation is required in order to ensure universally high standards in screening procedures.
Similar articles
-
Wide variation in adenoma detection rates at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.Gastroenterology. 2004 May;126(5):1247-56. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2004.01.023. Gastroenterology. 2004. PMID: 15131784
-
Development of a video assessment scoring method to determine the accuracy of endoscopist performance at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy.Endoscopy. 2006 Mar;38(3):218-25. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870445. Endoscopy. 2006. PMID: 16528646
-
Factors affecting adenoma detection rate in a national flexible sigmoidoscopy screening programme: a retrospective analysis.Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Mar;4(3):239-247. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30387-X. Epub 2019 Jan 15. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019. PMID: 30655218
-
Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer.Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2017 Aug;31(4):441-446. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2017.07.002. Epub 2017 Jul 6. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2017. PMID: 28842054 Review.
-
Quality in the technical performance of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy: recommendations of an international multi-society task group.Gut. 2005 Jun;54(6):807-13. doi: 10.1136/gut.2004.052282. Gut. 2005. PMID: 15888789 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
The inulin hydrogen breath test predicts the quality of colonic preparation.Surg Endosc. 2014 May;28(5):1579-87. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3354-0. Epub 2014 Jan 1. Surg Endosc. 2014. PMID: 24380986
-
Impact of fair bowel preparation quality on adenoma and serrated polyp detection: data from the New Hampshire colonoscopy registry by using a standardized preparation-quality rating.Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Sep;80(3):463-70. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.03.021. Epub 2014 May 10. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014. PMID: 24818550 Free PMC article.
-
A feasibility study of probiotics pretreatment as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy in constipated patients.Dig Dis Sci. 2010 Aug;55(8):2344-51. doi: 10.1007/s10620-009-1011-1. Epub 2009 Oct 15. Dig Dis Sci. 2010. PMID: 19830558 Clinical Trial.
-
Adenoma detection in excellent versus good bowel preparation for colonoscopy.J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015 Apr;49(4):313-9. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000270. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015. PMID: 25494362 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy of morning-only 4 liter sulfa free polyethylene glycol vs 2 liter polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid for afternoon colonoscopy.World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Aug 14;20(30):10620-7. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i30.10620. World J Gastroenterol. 2014. PMID: 25132784 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials