1 / 21

A Quality Colonoscopy:  Are You Providing One?

A Quality Colonoscopy:  Are You Providing One?. Robert P Yatto MD Cumberland Medical Center Crossville, Tennessee. Quality Colonoscopy Patient Perspective Pre 1999-2001 era. It was really quick! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt!.

tacy
Download Presentation

A Quality Colonoscopy:  Are You Providing One?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Quality Colonoscopy: Are You Providing One? Robert P Yatto MDCumberland Medical CenterCrossville, Tennessee

  2. Quality Colonoscopy Patient Perspective Pre 1999-2001 era It was really quick! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt! It didn’t hurt!

  3. Quality Colonoscopy Patient Perspective Post 1999-2001 era My doctor had a good withdrawal time My doctor finds polyps in over 1/3 of his patients My doctor reaches the cecum 95% of the time It didn’t hurt!

  4. 1999-2001? 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) published “To ERR is Human: Building a Safer Health System” 2001 IOM report “Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for 21st Century”

  5. Quality Colonoscopy Gastroenterologist Perspective Pre 2006 Prep was Excellent It was quick! Patient was quiet (It didn’t hurt)

  6. Quality Colonoscopy Gastroenterologist Perspective Post 2006 Used ASGE AUGE guideline indication for colonoscopy Risk assessment performed prior to exam Cecal intubation with photo documentation Withdraw time > 6 minutes on a negative screening exam Etc.

  7. Measuring the Quality of Endoscopy “…It becomes clear that we have no reliable way to distinguish a high-quality endoscopic procedure done by a trained endoscopist from a procedure performed by an inadequately trained provider. Fortunately, adverse events are too rare to track as a meaningful indicator of quality… We need objective, practical ways to grade our performance.” John W. Popp, MD FACGDavid J. Bjorkman, M.D., MSPH

  8. Measuring the Quality of Endoscopy “The ASGE and ACG recognize that if we do not develop evidence-based quality measures, an administrative or governmental agency without experience or insight into the practice of endoscopy will define these measures for us.” John W. Popp, MD FACGDavid J. Bjorkman, M.D., MSPH

  9. How Good Is Your Colonoscopy? New York Times December 16, 2008“Colonoscopies Miss Many Cancers, Study Finds” For many years doctors and patient thought colonoscopies, the popular screening test for colorectal cancer, were all but infallible. Have a colonoscopy, get any precancerous polyps removed, and you should almost never get colon cancer……And now a Canadian study, published Tuesday in journal Annals……found the test much less accurate than anyone expected.

  10. Variance in Protection Possible Explanations Incomplete exams Missed lesions Suboptimal prep Biologic differences Operator factors41% by general surgeons42% by internist/family practice16% by gastroenterologists Clinical Gastroenterology Hepatology 2008; 6:1117-1121

  11. Quantity vs. Quality Production Pressure in Endoscopy: Balancing Quantity and Quality – Lawrence B. Cohen Increase volume in response to decreased reimbursement Production pressure can adversely impact outcomes Be flexible in scheduling Document quality and benchmark Gastroenterology 2008; 135:1842-1844

  12. Quantity: A Changing Climate

  13. Quality indicators for Colonoscopy Appropriate indication Informed consent obtained including risks Use of recommended polypectomy and post cancer resection surveillance intervals Use of recommended IBD surveillance intervals Documentation of prep quality

  14. Quality indicators for Colonoscopy Cecal intubation rate with photo documentation- appendiceal orifice- ileocecal valve- terminal ileum- >90% overall > 95% screening Rate of detection of adenomas in screening Withdraw time documentation Biopsies obtained in patients with diarrhea

  15. Quality indicators for Colonoscopy Number and description of biopsy samples in IBD surveillance (32) Polyps < 2 cm resected or documented unresectability Incidence of perforation by procedure type (all indications vs screening) is measured- all 0.002- screening 0.001 Incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding is measured Post-polypectomy bleeding managed non-operatively

  16. Quality indicators for Colonoscopy

  17. Colon WD Time Colonoscopy Withdrawal Time and Risk of Neoplasia at 5 Years: Results From VA Cooperative Studies Program 380. “In this study with a mean baseline WT > 12 min, there was no detectable association between WT and risk of future neoplasia. The medial center-level WT was positively correlated with adenoma detection. Therefore, above a certain threshold, WT may no longer be an adequate quality measure for screening colonoscopy.” Conclusion Gellad et al, Am Jnl Gastro Aug 2010

  18. Quality indicators for Colonoscopy

  19. Candidate Indicators to Define Quality Cecal intubation rate…quality vs. competence???- 95% with photo documentation Adenoma detection rate- Equal to or greater than 25% in men- Equal to or greater than 15% in woman Post-polypectomy surveillance - Overuse/underuse Hewett, Rex AM Jnl Gastro Sept 2010

  20. The future is now. Start reporting. The future will change. Be prepared for it. Robert P Yatto MDCumberland Medical CenterCrossville, Tennessee

More Related