Defining adenoma detection rate benchmarks in average-risk male veterans

Mustapha M. El-Halabi, Douglas Rex, Akira Saito, George J. Eckert, Charles Kahi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Aims: Veterans have higher prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than non-veterans; however, it is not known whether specific Veterans Affairs (VA) adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks are required. We compared ADRs of a group of endoscopists for colonoscopies performed at a VA center with their ADRs at a non-VA academic medical center. Methods: This was a retrospective review of screening colonoscopies performed by endoscopists who practice at the Indianapolis VA and Indiana University (IU). Patients were average-risk men aged 50 years or older. ADR, proximal ADR, advanced ADR, and adenomas per colonoscopy were compared between IU and the VA groups. Results: Six endoscopists performed screening colonoscopies at both locations during the study period (470 at IU vs 608 at the VA). The overall ADR was not significantly different between IU and the VA (58% vs 61%; P =.21). Advanced neoplasia detection rate (13% vs 17%; P =.46), proximal ADR (46% vs 47%; P =.31), and adenomas per colonoscopy (1.59 vs 1.84; P =.24) were not significantly different. There were no significant differences in cecal intubation rate (100% vs 99%; P =.13) or withdrawal time (10.9 vs 11.1 min; P =.28). In regression analysis, there was significant correlation between the attending-specific ADRs at IU and the VA (P =.041, r2 = 0.69). Conclusions: In this study of average-risk men undergoing screening colonoscopies by the same group of endoscopists, the ADRs of VA and non-VA colonoscopies were not significantly different. This suggests that a VA-specific ADR target is not required for endoscopists with high ADRs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Benchmarking
Veterans
Adenoma
Colonoscopy
Intubation
Neoplasms
Regression Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Defining adenoma detection rate benchmarks in average-risk male veterans. / El-Halabi, Mustapha M.; Rex, Douglas; Saito, Akira; Eckert, George J.; Kahi, Charles.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

El-Halabi, Mustapha M. ; Rex, Douglas ; Saito, Akira ; Eckert, George J. ; Kahi, Charles. / Defining adenoma detection rate benchmarks in average-risk male veterans. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2018.
@article{d7eb022e453c478aba267d24d3345e5d,
title = "Defining adenoma detection rate benchmarks in average-risk male veterans",
abstract = "Background and Aims: Veterans have higher prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than non-veterans; however, it is not known whether specific Veterans Affairs (VA) adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks are required. We compared ADRs of a group of endoscopists for colonoscopies performed at a VA center with their ADRs at a non-VA academic medical center. Methods: This was a retrospective review of screening colonoscopies performed by endoscopists who practice at the Indianapolis VA and Indiana University (IU). Patients were average-risk men aged 50 years or older. ADR, proximal ADR, advanced ADR, and adenomas per colonoscopy were compared between IU and the VA groups. Results: Six endoscopists performed screening colonoscopies at both locations during the study period (470 at IU vs 608 at the VA). The overall ADR was not significantly different between IU and the VA (58{\%} vs 61{\%}; P =.21). Advanced neoplasia detection rate (13{\%} vs 17{\%}; P =.46), proximal ADR (46{\%} vs 47{\%}; P =.31), and adenomas per colonoscopy (1.59 vs 1.84; P =.24) were not significantly different. There were no significant differences in cecal intubation rate (100{\%} vs 99{\%}; P =.13) or withdrawal time (10.9 vs 11.1 min; P =.28). In regression analysis, there was significant correlation between the attending-specific ADRs at IU and the VA (P =.041, r2 = 0.69). Conclusions: In this study of average-risk men undergoing screening colonoscopies by the same group of endoscopists, the ADRs of VA and non-VA colonoscopies were not significantly different. This suggests that a VA-specific ADR target is not required for endoscopists with high ADRs.",
author = "El-Halabi, {Mustapha M.} and Douglas Rex and Akira Saito and Eckert, {George J.} and Charles Kahi",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.021",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining adenoma detection rate benchmarks in average-risk male veterans

AU - El-Halabi, Mustapha M.

AU - Rex, Douglas

AU - Saito, Akira

AU - Eckert, George J.

AU - Kahi, Charles

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background and Aims: Veterans have higher prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than non-veterans; however, it is not known whether specific Veterans Affairs (VA) adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks are required. We compared ADRs of a group of endoscopists for colonoscopies performed at a VA center with their ADRs at a non-VA academic medical center. Methods: This was a retrospective review of screening colonoscopies performed by endoscopists who practice at the Indianapolis VA and Indiana University (IU). Patients were average-risk men aged 50 years or older. ADR, proximal ADR, advanced ADR, and adenomas per colonoscopy were compared between IU and the VA groups. Results: Six endoscopists performed screening colonoscopies at both locations during the study period (470 at IU vs 608 at the VA). The overall ADR was not significantly different between IU and the VA (58% vs 61%; P =.21). Advanced neoplasia detection rate (13% vs 17%; P =.46), proximal ADR (46% vs 47%; P =.31), and adenomas per colonoscopy (1.59 vs 1.84; P =.24) were not significantly different. There were no significant differences in cecal intubation rate (100% vs 99%; P =.13) or withdrawal time (10.9 vs 11.1 min; P =.28). In regression analysis, there was significant correlation between the attending-specific ADRs at IU and the VA (P =.041, r2 = 0.69). Conclusions: In this study of average-risk men undergoing screening colonoscopies by the same group of endoscopists, the ADRs of VA and non-VA colonoscopies were not significantly different. This suggests that a VA-specific ADR target is not required for endoscopists with high ADRs.

AB - Background and Aims: Veterans have higher prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than non-veterans; however, it is not known whether specific Veterans Affairs (VA) adenoma detection rate (ADR) benchmarks are required. We compared ADRs of a group of endoscopists for colonoscopies performed at a VA center with their ADRs at a non-VA academic medical center. Methods: This was a retrospective review of screening colonoscopies performed by endoscopists who practice at the Indianapolis VA and Indiana University (IU). Patients were average-risk men aged 50 years or older. ADR, proximal ADR, advanced ADR, and adenomas per colonoscopy were compared between IU and the VA groups. Results: Six endoscopists performed screening colonoscopies at both locations during the study period (470 at IU vs 608 at the VA). The overall ADR was not significantly different between IU and the VA (58% vs 61%; P =.21). Advanced neoplasia detection rate (13% vs 17%; P =.46), proximal ADR (46% vs 47%; P =.31), and adenomas per colonoscopy (1.59 vs 1.84; P =.24) were not significantly different. There were no significant differences in cecal intubation rate (100% vs 99%; P =.13) or withdrawal time (10.9 vs 11.1 min; P =.28). In regression analysis, there was significant correlation between the attending-specific ADRs at IU and the VA (P =.041, r2 = 0.69). Conclusions: In this study of average-risk men undergoing screening colonoscopies by the same group of endoscopists, the ADRs of VA and non-VA colonoscopies were not significantly different. This suggests that a VA-specific ADR target is not required for endoscopists with high ADRs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054573344&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054573344&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.021

DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.021

M3 - Article

C2 - 30144416

AN - SCOPUS:85054573344

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

ER -