Sustained colonoscopy quality improvement using a simple intervention bundle.

BACKGROUND: Unacceptable variation in colonoscopy quality exists. The Quality Improvement in Colonoscopy (QIC) study in 2011 improved quality by introducing an evidence-based "bundle" of measures into routine colonoscopy practice. The QIC bundle included: minimal cecal withdrawal time of ≥ 6 minutes; hyoscine butylbromide use; supine patient position for transverse colon examination; rectal retroflexion. Colonoscopy quality was measured by adenoma detection rate (ADR). The current study measured whether these effects led to a sustained change in practice 3 years following implementation. METHODS: This observational study collected data from eight hospital trusts (sites) in the United Kingdom for a 6-month period, 3 years following QIC bundle implementation. Use of the antispasmodic, hyoscine butylbromide, was measured as a marker of bundle uptake. Bundle effectiveness was measured by ADR change. Comparisons were made between data before and immediately after implementation of the bundle. RESULTS: 28 615 colonoscopies by 188 colonoscopists were studied. Hyoscine butylbromide use increased from 15.8 % pre-implementation to 47.4 % in the sustainability phase (P < 0.01) indicating sustained engagement with QIC measures. ADR was higher in the sustainability period compared with pre-intervention, but only reached statistical significance among the poorest-performing colonoscopists. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a simple, inexpensive, pragmatic intervention significantly changed practice over a sustained period, improving colonoscopy quality as measured by ADR, particularly in poorer performers. QIC demonstrates that an easy-to-implement quality improvement approach can deliver a sustained change in practice for many years post intervention.

Narrow band imaging optical diagnosis of small colorectal polyps in routine clinical practice: the Detect Inspect Characterise Resect and Discard 2 (DISCARD 2) study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate optical characterisation and removal of small adenomas (<10 mm) at colonoscopy would allow hyperplastic polyps to be left in situ and surveillance intervals to be determined without the need for histopathology. Although accurate in specialist practice the performance of narrow band imaging (NBI), colonoscopy in routine clinical practice is poorly understood. METHODS: NBI-assisted optical diagnosis was compared with reference standard histopathological findings in a prospective, blinded study, which recruited adults undergoing routine colonoscopy in six general hospitals in the UK. Participating colonoscopists (N=28) were trained using the NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic (NICE) classification (relating to colour, vessel structure and surface pattern). By comparing the optical and histological findings in patients with only small polyps, test sensitivity was determined at the patient level using two thresholds: presence of adenoma and need for surveillance. Accuracy of identifying adenomatous polyps <10 mm was compared at the polyp level using hierarchical models, allowing determinants of accuracy to be explored. FINDINGS: Of 1688 patients recruited, 722 (42.8%) had polyps <10 mm with 567 (78.5%) having only polyps <10 mm. Test sensitivity (presence of adenoma, N=499 patients) by NBI optical diagnosis was 83.4% (95% CI 79.6% to 86.9%), significantly less than the 95% sensitivity (p<0.001) this study was powered to detect. Test sensitivity (need for surveillance) was 73.0% (95% CI 66.5% to 79.9%). Analysed at the polyp level, test sensitivity (presence of adenoma, N=1620 polyps) was 76.1% (95% CI 72.8% to 79.1%). In fully adjusted analyses, test sensitivity was 99.4% (95% CI 98.2% to 99.8%) if two or more NICE adenoma characteristics were identified. Neither colonoscopist expertise, confidence in diagnosis nor use of high definition colonoscopy independently improved test accuracy. INTERPRETATION: This large multicentre study demonstrates that NBI optical diagnosis cannot currently be recommended for application in routine clinical practice. Further work is required to evaluate whether variation in test accuracy is related to polyp characteristics or colonoscopist training. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01603927).

Factors influencing change in clinical practice: A qualitative evaluation of the implementation of the quality improvement in colonoscopy study.

PURPOSE: The quality improvement in colonoscopy study was a region wide service improvement study to improve adenoma detection rate at colonoscopy by implementing evidence into routine colonoscopy practice. Implementing evidence into clinical practice can be challenging. The purpose of this paper is to perform a qualitative interview study to evaluate factors that influenced implementation within the study. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff in endoscopy units taking part in the quality improvement in colonoscopy study, after study completion. Units and interviewees were purposefully sampled to ensure a range of experiences was represented. Interviews were conducted with 11 participants. FINDINGS: Key themes influencing uptake of the quality improvement in colonoscopy evidence bundle included time, study promotion, training, engagement, positive outcomes and modifications. Areas within themes were increased awareness of quality in colonoscopy (QIC), emphasis on withdrawal time and empowerment of endoscopy nurses to encourage the use of quality measures were positive outcomes of the study. The simple, visible study posters were reported as useful in aiding study promotion. Feedback sessions improved engagement. Challenges included difficulty arranging set-up meetings and engaging certain speciality groups. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This evaluation suggests that methods to implement evidence into clinical practice should include identification and empowerment of team members who can positively influence engagement, simple, visible reminders and feedback. Emphasis on timing of meetings and strategies to engage speciality groups should also be given consideration. Qualitative evaluations can provide important insights into why quality improvement initiatives are successful or not, across different sites.

A multicenter pragmatic study of an evidence-based intervention to improve adenoma detection: the Quality Improvement in Colonoscopy (QIC) study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Low adenoma detection rates (ADRs) at colonoscopy are linked to significantly higher interval cancer rates, and vary between colonoscopists. Studies demonstrate that lesion detection is improved by: withdrawal time of ≥ 6 minutes; use of hyoscine butylbromide; position change; and rectal retroflexion. We evaluated the feasibility of implementing the above "bundle" of interventions into colonoscopy practice, and the effect on ADR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A longitudinal cohort design was used. Implementation combined central training, local promotion, and feedback. The uptake marker was change in hyoscine butylbromide use. Comparisons were between the 3 months before and the 9 months after the implementation phase, globally, by endoscopy unit and by quartile when colonoscopists were ranked according to baseline ADR. Chi-squared or Fisher's tests were used to evaluate significance. RESULTS: 12 units participated. Global and quartile analyses included data from 118 and 68 colonoscopists and 17 508 and 14 193 procedures respectively. A significant increase in hyoscine butylbromide use was observed globally (54.4 % vs. 15.8 %, P < 0.001), in all endoscopy units (P < 0.001) and quartiles (P < 0.001). A significant increase in ADR was observed globally (18.1 % vs. 16.0 %, P = 0.002) and in the lower two colonoscopist quartiles (P < 0.001), with a nonsignificant increase in the upper middle quartile and a significant fall to 21.5 %. in the upper quartile. The significant variations in ADR among the upper three quartiles disappeared. CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, introduction of a simple, inexpensive, evidence-based "bundle" of measures is feasible and is associated with higher global ADR, driven by improvements amongst the poorest performing colonoscopists.

Developing a clinical research network: the Northern Region Endoscopy Group experience.

Research is central to the National Health Service. Clinical trial recruitment has been aided by the National Institute for Health Research's Comprehensive Research Network but these networks do not support development of research. The Northern Region Endoscopy Group (NREG) was founded in 2007, encompasses 17 endoscopy units and has become a highly successful collaborative research network. The network is now a major contributor to UK trials, has published over 20 papers (>60 abstracts) and holds grants totalling more than £1.5 million. The NREG provides an exemplar model of how collaborative working can contribute significantly to biomedical research.

Quality in colonoscopy: European perspectives and practice.

Colonoscopy is the 'gold standard' investigation of the colon. High quality colonoscopy is essential to diagnose early cancer and reduce its incidence through the detection and removal of pre-malignant adenomas. In this review, we discuss the key components of a high quality colonoscopy, review methods for improving quality, emerging technologies that have the potential to improve quality and highlight areas for future work.

Aspirin users attending for NHS bowel cancer screening have less colorectal neoplasia: chemoprevention or false-positive faecal occult blood testing?

OBJECTIVE: The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) uses faecal occult blood (FOB) testing to select patients aged 60-69 years for colonoscopy. AIM: To examine the association between aspirin use and the detection of colorectal neoplasia in screened patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on individuals who underwent colonoscopy following a positive FOB test in the South of Tyne area between February 2007 and 2009. The relationship between the presence of colorectal neoplasia and age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and current aspirin use were evaluated using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 701 individuals underwent colonoscopy. 414 (59.1%) were male and 358 (51.1%) aged over 65 years. Males had a higher incidence of colorectal neoplasia (relative risk 2.26, 95% CI 1.65-3.10, p < 0.001). Current aspirin use was associated with a lower neoplasia detection rate (relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.50-0.98, p = 0.039). Increased age and BMI were not significantly associated with higher neoplasia detection. CONCLUSION: Amongst individuals undergoing colonoscopy following a positive FOB test in the BCSP, current aspirin use was associated with a lower incidence of colorectal neoplasia. This may represent the chemopreventative effect of aspirin or increased false positivity of FOB testing. Further work is needed to clarify the contribution of each and could reduce the number of unnecessary colonoscopies.

High yield of colorectal neoplasia detected by colonoscopy following a positive faecal occult blood test in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

OBJECTIVES: The UK National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) is based on a strategy of biennial faecal occult blood (FOB) testing. Positive results are classified as 'abnormal' or 'weak positive' based on the number of positive windows per kit or need for repeat testing. Colonoscopy is offered to both groups. We evaluate the relationship between FOB test positivity and clinical outcome in the BCSP. SETTING: The South of Tyne and Tees (UK) Bowel Cancer Screening Centres. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on all individuals who were offered FOB testing and colonoscopy between February 2007 and February 2009. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between FOB test positivity and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Following FOB testing, 1524 individuals underwent colonoscopy, 1259 (83%) after a 'weak positive' and 265 (17%) an 'abnormal' result. Cancer was detected in 180 (11.8%) and adenomas in 758 (49.7%). Individuals with an 'abnormal' result were more likely to have cancer or be 'high risk' for the development of future adenomas (110/265, 41.5%) than those with 'weak positive' results, (236/1259, 18.7%, P < 0.0001). Those with Dukes stage B, C or D cancers or cancers proximal to the splenic flexure were more likely to have an 'abnormal' result. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of colonoscopies were performed following 'weak positive' FOB results. Those with an 'abnormal' result were more likely to be diagnosed with cancer. The high yield of pathology in both the 'abnormal' and 'weak positive' groups justifies the need for colonoscopy in both.