Turan SET, Halil RAKICI, Remzi AKDOĞAN, Muhammet Kadri ÇOLAKOĞLU, Muhammet Ali AYVAZ

Evaluation of colonoscopy requests in an open-access endoscopy unit

Aim: Improper colonoscopy requests from different medical fields, especially like in an open access endoscopy unit, increases workload of the unit and healthcare expenses. For standardize these requests, eligibility criterias emerged. The aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of colonoscopy requests performed in an open-access endoscopy unit of a university hospital and determine possible causes of the improper requests by patient characteristics, colonoscopy indications and results.Material and Methods: Between January 2009 and January 2015, 3259 patients who were referred for colonoscopy in an open-access endoscopy unit of a university hospital were enrolled into study. Post-procedure colonoscopy reports, along with their diagnoses, were recorded. All records were then evaluated retrospectively and the patient’s indications and patients’ results were compared and reasons for improper requests were discussed.Results: The mean age of the patients who underwent colonoscopy was 56.68 year, and 56.2% of the patients were males. When the requests were placed in order of frequency, the first three cases were rectal bleeding, anemia, and abdominal pain. Most of the patients did not have any pathology on colonoscopy (37.8%, n = 1238). The other most common diagnoses were hemorrhoids and colon polyps. Malignancy detection rate by colonoscopy was 5.3%. Associations between requests and results were detailed.Conclusion: Eligibility criterias should be used to minimize inappropriate requests and training should be provided for experts about colonoscopy these criterias, or a gastroenterologist should be consulted before colonoscopy procedure, especially for open-access endoscopy units

PDF

___

Brenna E, Skreden K, Waldum HL. The Benefit of Colonoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1990;25:81-88.
Cohen LB, Wecsler JS, Gaetano JN, et al. Endoscopic sedation in the United States: results from a nationwide survey. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:967-74.
Sonnenber A, Amorosi SL, Lacey MJ, et al. Patterns of endoscopy in the United States: analysis of data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the National Endoscopic Database. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:489-96.
Froehlich F, Harris JK, Wietlisbach V, et al. Current sedation and monitoring practice for colonoscopy: an International Observational Study (EPAGE). Endoscopy. 2006;38:461-9.
Misra T, Lalor E, Fedorak RN. Endoscopic perforation rates at a Canadian university teaching hospital. Can J Gastroenterol. 2004;18:221-6.
Eisen GM, Baron TH, Dominitz JA, et al. Open Access endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:793-5.
Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Marlotto AB, et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:849-57.
Jover R, Herraiz M, Alarcon O, et al. Clinical practice guidelines: quality of colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening. Endoscopy. 2012;44:444-51.
Lee RH. Quality colonoscopy: a matter of time,technique or technology? World J Gastroenterology. 2013;19:1517-22.
Suriani R, Rizzetto M, Mazzucco D, et al. Appropriateness of colonoscopy in a digestive endoscopy unit: a prospective study using ASGE guidelines. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15:41-5.
Grassini M, Verna C, Niola P, et al. Appropriateness of colonoscopy: diagnostic yield and safety guidelines. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:1816-9.
Harris JK, Froehlich F, Gonvers JJ, et al. The appropriateness of colonoscopy: a multi-center, international, observational study. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:150-7.
Vader JP, Wietlisbach V, Harris JK, et al. Gastroenterologists overestimate the appropriateness of colonoscopies they perform: an international observational study. Endoscopy. 2005;37:840-6.
Vader JP, Pache I, Froehlich F, et al. Overuse and underuse of colonoscopy in a European primary care setting. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;52:593-9.
Grassini M, Verna C, Battaglia E, et al. Education improves colonoscopy appropriateness. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:88-93.
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Appropriate use of gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;52:831-7.
Jullierat P, Peytremann-Bridevaux I, Vader JP, et al. Appropriateness of colonoscopy in Europe (EPAGE II). Presentation of methodology, general results and analysis of complications. Endoscopy. 2009;41:240-6.
Argüello L, Pertejo V, Ponce M, et al, The appropriateness of colonoscopies at a teaching hospital: magnitude, associated factors and comparison of EPAGE and EPAGE-II criteria. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:138-45.
Gimeno-Garcia AZ, Quintero E. Colonoscopy appropriateness: Really needed or a waste of time? World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;7:94-101
Sanaka MR, Gohel T, Podugu A, et al. Adenoma and sessile serrated polyp detection rates: variation by patient sex and colonic segment but not speciality of the endoscopist. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:1113-9.
Issa IA, Noureddine M. Colorectal cancer screening: An updated review of the available options. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23:5086-96.
Wichers CD, van Heel NC, Ter Borg F, et al. Triage of colonoscopies: open Access endoscopy versus outpatient consultation with a gastroenterologist. Endosc Int Open. 2014;2:187-90.