Association of Trainee Participation in Colonoscopy Procedures With Quality Metrics
- PMID: 36044211
- PMCID: PMC9434358
- DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.29538
Association of Trainee Participation in Colonoscopy Procedures With Quality Metrics
Abstract
Importance: Trainees routinely participate in colonoscopy procedures, yet whether their involvement is positively or negatively associated with procedural quality is unknown because prior studies involved small number of trainees and/or supervisors, lacked generalizability, and/or failed to adjust for potential confounders.
Objective: To assess the association between trainee participation and colonoscopy quality metrics.
Design, setting, and participants: This multicenter population-based cohort study was conducted at 21 academic and community hospitals between April 1, 2017, and October 31, 2018, among consecutive adult patients undergoing colonoscopy. Procedures performed by endoscopists who did not supervise trainees were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed from April 3, 2017, to October 31, 2018.
Exposure: Participation by a trainee, defined as a resident or fellow enrolled in a gastroenterology or general surgery training program.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were sessile serrated polyp detection rate (ssPDR), polyp detection rate (PDR), cecal intubation rate (CIR), and perforation rate.
Results: A total of 35 499 colonoscopies (18 989 women [53.5%]; mean [SD] patient age, 60.0 [14.1] years) were performed by 71 physicians (mean [SD] time in practice, 14.0 [9.3] years); 5941 colonoscopies (16.7%) involved trainees. There were no significant differences in the ADR (26.4% vs 27.3%; P = .19), CIR (96.7% vs 97.2%; P = .07), and perforation rate (0.05% vs 0.06%; P = .82) when trainees participated vs when they did not participate, whereas the the ssPDR (4.4% vs 5.2%; P = .009) and PDR (39.2% vs 42.0%; P < .001) were significantly lower when trainees participated vs when they did not. After adjustment for potential confounders, the ADR (risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; P = .30), PDR (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04; P = .47), and CIR (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10; P = .38) were not associated with trainee participation, although the ssPDR remained significantly lower (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .03).
Conclusions and relevance: This study suggests that trainee involvement during colonoscopy was associated with reduced ssPDR but not other colonoscopy outcome measures. Extra care should be exercised when examining the right colon when trainees are involved.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
Polyp Detection Rate Correlates Strongly with Adenoma Detection Rate in Trainee Endoscopists.Dig Dis Sci. 2020 Aug;65(8):2229-2233. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06049-0. Epub 2020 Jan 11. Dig Dis Sci. 2020. PMID: 31927766 Free PMC article.
-
Latest Generation High-Definition Colonoscopy Increases Adenoma Detection Rate by Trainee Endoscopists.Dig Dis Sci. 2021 Aug;66(8):2756-2762. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06543-5. Epub 2020 Aug 18. Dig Dis Sci. 2021. PMID: 32808142
-
Factors Associated with Surveillance Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Polyp Detection Rates.Dig Dis Sci. 2017 Dec;62(12):3579-3585. doi: 10.1007/s10620-017-4792-7. Epub 2017 Oct 17. Dig Dis Sci. 2017. PMID: 29043592 Free PMC article.
-
Quality indicators for screening colonoscopy and colonoscopist performance and the subsequent risk of interval colorectal cancer: a systematic review.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019 Nov;17(11):2265-2300. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003927. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019. PMID: 31188154
-
Effect of fellow involvement on colonoscopy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Dig Liver Dis. 2019 Aug;51(8):1079-1085. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2019.05.012. Epub 2019 Jul 2. Dig Liver Dis. 2019. PMID: 31272937
Cited by
-
Effectiveness of switching endoscopists for repeat surveillance colonoscopy: a retrospective study.BMC Gastroenterol. 2023 Oct 6;23(1):347. doi: 10.1186/s12876-023-02981-3. BMC Gastroenterol. 2023. PMID: 37803276 Free PMC article.
-
The implementation of computer-aided detection in an initial endoscopy training improves the quality measures of trainees' future colonoscopies: a retrospective cohort study.Surg Endosc. 2025 Aug;39(8):5276-5286. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11890-3. Epub 2025 Jun 30. Surg Endosc. 2025. PMID: 40588603 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Rees CJ, Gibson ST, Rutter MD, et al. . UK key performance indicators & quality assurance standards for colonoscopy. British Society of Gastroenterology. Accessed August 3, 2020. https://www.bsg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/UK-Key-Performance-Ind...
-
- Armstrong D, Barkun A, Bridges R, et al. ; Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Safety and Quality Indicators in Endoscopy Consensus Group . Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy. Can J Gastroenterol. 2012;26(1):17-31. doi:10.1155/2012/173739 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous