4.3 Article

Quality of rural colonoscopy outperforms key performance indicators in a multi-centre prospective clinical study

Journal

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 93, Issue 3, Pages 528-533

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ans.18072

Keywords

adenoma detection rate; colonoscopy; colorectal cancer; multicentre study; rural surgery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to assess the quality and safety of colonoscopies performed in non-metropolitan settings. The results show that colonoscopy performed in non-metropolitan Australian setting outperforms key performance indicators set by national institutions.
Background High-quality colonoscopy is vital for the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps and early diagnosis of colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to prospectively assess the quality and safety of colonoscopies performed in the non-metropolitan setting. Key performance indicators measured include completion, polypectomy and adenoma/serrated polyp detection rates, rate of adequate bowel preparation, withdrawal time and complications. Methods Prospective data collection for all colonoscopies performed over a one-year period in seven non-metropolitan South Australian hospitals. Two general surgeons and twelve registrars working in rural South Australian hospitals (Mount Gambier, Millicent, Naracoorte, Port Lincoln, Port Augusta, Whyalla and Berri) contributed to this study. Results In total 3497 colonoscopies were analysed. Complete colonoscopy was achieved in 96.1%. The adenoma detection and serrated polyp detection rates were 25.6% and 5.4% respectively. Cancer was detected in 71 patients (2%). Colonic perforation occurred in five patients (0.1%). There was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusions Colonoscopy performed in the non-metropolitan Australian setting outperforms key performance indicators set by national institutions. This is the first Australian prospective multi-centre study investigating the quality and safety of endoscopic procedures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available