摘要
BACKGROUND Ensuring colonoscopy procedure quality is vital to the success of screening and surveillance programmes for bowel cancer in Australia. However, the data on the performance of quality metrics, through adequate adenoma detection, bowel preparation, and procedure completion rates, in the Australian public sector is limited. Understanding these can inform quality improvement to further strengthen our capacity for prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer.AIM To determine the quality of colonoscopy in Australian teaching hospitals and their association with proceduralist specialty, trainee involvement, and location.METHODS We retrospectively evaluated 2443 consecutive colonoscopy procedure reports from 1 January to 1 April, 2018 from five public teaching tertiary hospitals in Australia(median 60 years old, 49% male). Data for bowel preparation quality,procedure completion rates, and detection rates of clinically significant adenomas, conventional adenomas, and serrated lesions was collected and compared to national criteria for quality in colonoscopy. Participating hospital, proceduralist specialty, and trainee involvement indicators were used for stratification. Data was analysed using Chi-squared tests of independence, MannWhitney U, One-way ANOVA, and multivariate binary logistic regression.RESULTS Fifty-two point two percent(n = 1276) and 43.3%(n = 1057) were performed by medical and surgical proceduralists respectively, whilst 29.8%(n = 728) involved a trainee. Inadequate bowel preparation affected 7.3% of all procedures. The procedure completion rate was 95.1%, which increased to 97.5% after adjustment for bowel preparation quality. The pooled cancer, adenoma, and serrated lesion detection rates for all five hospitals were 3.5%, 40%, and 5.9% respectively. Assessed hospitals varied significantly by patient age(P < 0.001), work-force composition(P < 0.001), adequacy of bowel preparation(P < 0.001), and adenoma detection rate(P < 0.001). Two hospitals(40%) did not meet all national criteria for quality, due to a procedure completion rate of 94.5% or serrated lesion detection rate of 2.6%. Although lower than the other hospitals, the difference was not significant. Compared with surgical specialists, procedures performed by medical specialists involved older patients [65 years(inter-quartile range, IQR 58-73) vs 64 years(IQR 56-71);P = 0.04] and were associated with a higher adenoma detection rate [odds ratio(OR) 1.53;confidence interval: 1.21-1.94;P < 0.001]. Procedures involving trainee proceduralists were not associated with differences in the detection of cancer, adenoma, or serrated lesions, compared with specialists, or according to their medical or surgical background. On multivariate analysis, cancer detection was positively associated with patient age(OR 1.04;P < 0.001) and negatively associated with medical compared to surgical proceduralists(OR 0.54;P = 0.04). Conventional adenoma detection rates were independently associated with increasing patient age(OR 1.04;P < 0.001), positively associated with medical compared to surgical proceduralists(OR 1.41;P = 0.002) and negatively associated with male gender(OR 0.53;P < 0.001).CONCLUSION Significant differences in the quality of colonoscopy in Australia exist, even when national benchmarks are achieved. The role of possible contributing factors, like procedural specialty and patient gender need further evaluation.
