Analysis of Post-Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer and Its Subtypes in a Screening Programme.

Using the algorithm of the World Endoscopy Organisation (WEO), we have studied retrospectively all colorectal cancers, both detected and non-detected by the Basque Country screening programme from 2009 to 2017. In the screening programme 61,335 colonoscopies were performed following a positive Faecal Immunochemical test (FIT) (≥20 µg Hb/g faeces) and the 128 cases of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) detected were analysed. Among them, 50 interval type PCCRCs were diagnosed (before the recommended surveillance), 0.8 cases per 1000 colonoscopies performed, and 78 non-interval type PCCRCs (in the surveillance carried out at the recommended time or delayed), 1.3 per 1000 colonoscopies. Among the non-interval type PCCRCs, 61 cases were detected in the surveillance carried out at the recommended time (type A) and 17 when the surveillance was delayed (type B), 1 case per 1000 colonoscopies performed and 0.28 cases per 1000 colonoscopies performed, respectively. Interval type PCCRC is less frequent than non-interval type PCCRC. In interval type PCCRCs, CRCs detected in advanced stages (stages III-IV) were significantly more frequent than those detected in early stages, compared to those of non-interval type PCCRCs (OR = 3.057; 95% CI, 1.410-6.625; p < 0.005). Non-interval type B PCCRCs are less frequent than non-interval type A PCCRCs, but the frequency of advanced stages is higher in interval type B PCCRCs.

Impacto en la actividad asistencial y la salud de los profesionales de Atención Primaria durante el confinamiento / Impact on healthcare activities and the health of Primary Care professionals during lockdown

Objetivo: conocer el impacto del confinamiento en los hábitos de vida, la salud física y emocional de los trabajadores de Atención Primaria.Método: estudio transversal. Encuesta online a trabajadores que desempeñaron su actividad en dos centros de salud de Vizcaya, uno con atención presencial a pacientes con patología compatible con COVID-19 y otro que desarrolló actividad telefónica con pacientes con otras patologías. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo. Se compararon las variables categóricas mediante Chi cuadrado o test exacto de Fisher.Resultados: participaron 70 (54,29%) profesionales de 138, mayoritariamente enfermeras y médicos (71% en centro de salud con atención presencial y 72% en centro de salud con atención telefónica). No se encontraron diferencias en cuanto a la práctica de ejercicio físico ni alimentación, excepto en el consumo de comida precocinada casi todos los días (83,67% en centro con atención telefónica frente al 9,52% en centro con atención presencial, p< 0,001). Los sujetos de estudio han percibido un empeoramiento durante el confinamiento en relación al tiempo de actividad física (p= 0,027), alimentación (p< 0,001), tiempo delante de las pantallas (p= 0,010), salud física (p= 0,007) y bienestar emocional. Sin embargo, se ha percibido una mejoría en ambos grupos en relación a la tolerancia a la frustración (p< 0,001). El grupo con actividad presencial ha tenido un mayor impacto negativo en sus hábitos durante el confinamiento.Conclusiones: el confinamiento tuvo un cierto impacto en los hábitos de vida, la salud física y emocional de los trabajadores de Atención Primaria, y fue más acusado en el centro en el que desempeñaron su actividad laboral de forma presencial.(AU)

Objective: to understand the impact of lockdown on the lifestyle and physical and emotional health of Primary Care workers.Method: a cross-sectional study: an online survey for workers who performed their activity in two health centres in Bilbao, one with face-to-face assistance for patients with conditions compatible with COVID-19, and the other one conducting activity by telephone with patients presenting other conditions. A descriptive analysis was conducted; categorical variables were compared through Chi Square or Fisher’s Exact Test.Results: seventy (70 – 54.29%) professionals participated, out of 138; the majority were nurses and doctors (71% in the health centre with face-to-face care and 72% in the health centre with telephone care). No differences were found regarding physical exercise or diet, except in the fact of eating ready-made food almost every day (83.67% in the centre with care by telephone vs. 9.52% in the centre with face-to-face care, p< 0,001). The subjects of the study have perceived worsening during lockdown regarding their time of physical activity (p= 0.027), diet (p< 0.001), time spent in front of screens (p= 0.010), physical health (p= 0.007) and emotional wellbeing. However, an improvement was perceived in both arms regarding tolerance to frustration (p< 0.001). The arm with face-to-face activity has experienced a greater negative impact on their lifestyle during lockdown.Conclusions: lockdown has had some impact on the lifestyle and physical and emotional health of Primary Care workers, and this has been more pronounced in the centre where they performed their work activity face-to-face.(AU)

Indicadores de calidad y satisfacción de los pacientes en la colonoscopia / Quality indicators and patient satisfaction in colonoscopy

Introducción: La colonoscopia es la prueba de confirmación diagnóstica/terapéutica del cáncer colorrectal. La monitorización de la experiencia de las personas que se han realizado la prueba resulta de interés en la mejora de su calidad. El objetivo fue estudiar los factores relacionados con la experiencia y su relación con los indicadores de calidad de las guías de práctica clínica. Pacientes y métodos: Se realizó un estudio transversal observacional, incluyendo indicadores de calidad y experiencia (cuestionario mGHAA9 adaptado e historia clínica) con una muestra de 432 participantes de entre 40-75 años que se realizaron una colonoscopia en 2015. Análisis univariante y multivariante con regresión logística múltiple. Resultados: La satisfacción se asoció en el análisis multivariante con una valoración del tiempo de espera para la colonoscopia como corto (OR=3,80) (1,76-10,90; IC 95%), tener más de 55 años de edad (OR=2,60) (1,19-5,68; IC 95%), una valoración positiva de la experiencia de la preparación (OR=7,34) (3,15-17,09; IC 95%), no referir dolor o molestias durante el procedimiento (OR=3,71) (1,03-13,40; IC 95%) (p=0,006) y la realización de la exploración en un hospital terciario (OR=2,81) (1,17-6,72; IC 95%) (p=0,020). Discusión: El cuestionario mGHAA9 adaptado al castellano es útil para estudiar los factores relativos a la experiencia. Hay aspectos de mejora en los tiempos de espera, limpieza colónica, satisfacción con la preparación y los problemas poscolonoscopia. Se deben implementar intervenciones que permitan mejorar la experiencia de las personas y la calidad de la colonoscopia

Introduction: Colonoscopy is the diagnostic/therapeutic confirmation test for colorectal cancer. The monitoring of the experience of people who have undergone the test is interesting to improve the quality of the colonoscopy. The aim of the project was to study factors affecting patients' experience and their relationship with the quality indicators of the Clinical Practice Guidelines. Patients and methods: An observational cross-sectional study was conducted, including quality and experience indicators (adapted mGHAA-9 questionnaire and clinical history) in a sample of 432 participants aged between 40- and 75-years-old who had undergone a colonoscopy in 2015. Univariate and multivariate analysis with multiple logistic regression. Results: Satisfaction was associated in the multivariate analysis with evaluating the waiting time for the colonoscopy as short (OR=3.80) (1.76-10.90, 95% CI),>55-years-old (OR=2.60) (1.19-5.68, 95% CI), rating the experience with the preparation positively (OR=7.34) (3.15-17.09, 95% CI), not reporting pain or discomfort during the procedure (OR=3.71) (1.03-13.40, 95% CI) (P=.006) and being examined in a tertiary hospital (OR=2.81) (1.17-6.72; 95% CI) (P=.020). Discussion: The mGHAA-9 questionnaire adapted to Spanish is useful to evaluate patient experience factors. There are aspects to improve in terms of waiting time, colon cleansing, satisfaction with preparation and post-colonoscopy problems. Interventions should be implemented to enhance patient experience and colonoscopy quality

Quality indicators and patient satisfaction in colonoscopy. / Indicadores de calidad y satisfacción de los pacientes en la colonoscopia.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is the diagnostic/therapeutic confirmation test for colorectal cancer. The monitoring of the experience of people who have undergone the test is interesting to improve the quality of the colonoscopy. The aim of the project was to study factors affecting patients' experience and their relationship with the quality indicators of the Clinical Practice Guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational cross-sectional study was conducted, including quality and experience indicators (adapted mGHAA-9 questionnaire and clinical history) in a sample of 432 participants aged between 40- and 75-years-old who had undergone a colonoscopy in 2015. Univariate and multivariate analysis with multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Satisfaction was associated in the multivariate analysis with evaluating the waiting time for the colonoscopy as short (OR=3.80) (1.76-10.90, 95% CI),>55-years-old (OR=2.60) (1.19-5.68, 95% CI), rating the experience with the preparation positively (OR=7.34) (3.15-17.09, 95% CI), not reporting pain or discomfort during the procedure (OR=3.71) (1.03-13.40, 95% CI) (P=.006) and being examined in a tertiary hospital (OR=2.81) (1.17-6.72; 95% CI) (P=.020). DISCUSSION: The mGHAA-9 questionnaire adapted to Spanish is useful to evaluate patient experience factors. There are aspects to improve in terms of waiting time, colon cleansing, satisfaction with preparation and post-colonoscopy problems. Interventions should be implemented to enhance patient experience and colonoscopy quality.

Colorectal cancer screening program using FIT: quality of colonoscopy varies according to hospital type.

Background and study aims To compare the quality of colonoscopy in a population-based coordinated program of colorectal cancer screening according to type of hospital (academic or non-academic). Patients and methods Consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy after positive FIT (≥ 20 ug Hb/g feces) between January 2009 and September 2016 were prospectively included at five academic and seven non-academic public hospitals. Screening colonoscopy quality indicators considered were adenoma detection rate, cecal intubation rate, complications and bowel preparation quality. Results A total of 48,759 patients underwent colonoscopy, 34,616 (80 %) in academic hospitals and 14,143 in non-academic hospitals. Among these cases, 19,942 (37.1 %) advanced adenomas and 2,607 (5.3 %) colorectal cancers (CRCs) were detected, representing a total of 22,549 (46.2 %) cases of advanced neoplasia. The adenoma detection rate was 64 %, 63.1 % in academic hospitals and 66.4 % in non-academic hospitals ( P  < 0.001). Rates of advanced adenoma detection, cecal intubation and adequate colonic preparation were 45.8 %, 96.2 % and 88.3 %, respectively, and in all cases were lower (implying worse quality care) in academic hospitals (45.3 % vs 48.7 %; odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.84 - 0.91; 95.9 % vs 97 %; OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.38 - 0.69; and 86.4 % vs 93 %; OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.45 - 0.5; respectively; P  < 0.001 in all cases). In 13 patients, all in the academic hospital group, CRC was diagnosed after colonoscopy (0.26 cases × 1000 colonoscopies). Rates of CRC treated by endoscopy were similar in both types of hospital (30 %). The rate of severe complication was 1.2 % (602 patients), with no significant differences by hospital type: bleeding occurred in 1/147 colonoscopies and perforation in 1/329. One patient died within 30 days after screening colonoscopy. Conclusions The quality of colonoscopy was better in non-academic hospitals. The rate of detection of advanced neoplasia was higher in non-academic hospitals and correlated with the rate of post-colonoscopy CRC.