Trial reportThe American journal of gastroenterology2015
Stability of increased adenoma detection at colonoscopy. Follow-up of an endoscopic quality improvement program-EQUIP-II.
Trial report in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04636619 (Clinical Trial Evaluating the Effect of External Evaluation and Training on the Incomplete Resection Rate in Cold Snare Polypectomies in Colonic Lesions <10 Mm), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Clinical Trial Evaluating the Effect of External Evaluation and Training on the Incomplete Resection Rate in Cold Snare Polypectomies in Colonic Lesions <10 Mm (POLIPEVA Study)
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Training interventions to improve adenoma detection rates during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Quality Improvement in Gastroenterology: A Systematic Review of Practical Interventions for Clinicians.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Pooled it
- Impact of an Endoscopic Quality Improvement Program Focused on Adenoma Detection on Sessile Serrated Adenoma/Polyp Detection.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Trial
- Effect of external evaluation and training on the incomplete resection rate in cold snare polypectomies for colonic lesions <10 mm: a prospective Spanish study (POLIPEVA).Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Impact of a scalable training program on the quality of colonoscopy performance and risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Article
- Retrospective comparison of G-EYE balloon-colonoscopy with standard colonoscopy for increased adenoma detection rate and reduced polyp removal time.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Improving polyp detection at colonoscopy: Non-technological techniques.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Review
- Article
- Simple feedback of colonoscopy performance improved the number of adenomas per colonoscopy and serrated polyp detection rate.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Impact of the National Endoscopy Database (NED) on colonoscopy withdrawal time: a tertiary centre experience.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Article
- Effect of an educational intervention on colonoscopy quality outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Impact of a Citywide Benchmarking Intervention on Colonoscopy Quality Performance.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
- Improved detection of adenomas and sessile serrated polyps is maintained with continuous audit of colonoscopy.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Multidirectional Colonoscopy Quality Improvement Increases Adenoma Detection Rate: Results of the Seoul National University Hospital Healthcare System Gangnam Center Colonoscopy Quality Upgrade Project (Gangnam-CUP).Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
- Screening Colonoscopy Withdrawal Time Threshold for Adequate Proximal Serrated Polyp Detection Rate.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Observational
- Impact of differences in adenoma and proximal serrated polyp detection rate on the long-term effectiveness of FIT-based colorectal cancer screening.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Can polyp detection rate be used prospectively as a marker of adenoma detection rate?Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe recently completed a randomized controlled trial of an endoscopic quality improvement program (EQUIP) that demonstrated an improved adenoma detection rate (ADR) through simple educational interventions. The aim of this study (phase III) is to examine whether the improvement in ADR in the trained endoscopists remained stable with further follow-up.
methodsWe prospectively followed up 15 staff endoscopists who had previously been randomized to a quality improvement intervention. In the current study, we examined an additional 1,200 colonoscopy procedures conducted over a 5-month time period following the original study, referred to as phase III. During this time, all physicians received quarterly ADR and other quality metric feedback, and the previous control group was offered the educational intervention voluntarily. ADRs and adenoma per patient (APP) rates were estimated in the endoscopists who were and were not randomized to EQUIP training and compared with those obtained in phases I and II of the original study. The study was conducted in a tertiary care Academic Medical Center. The study sample comprised 1200 patients undergoing routine colonoscopy. The main outcome measurement was adenoma detection rate.
resultsThe previously observed increase in ADR in the trained group from 36% in phase I to 47% in phase II was maintained into phase III (46%). The ADR of the untrained group remained unchanged from phase I (36%) to phase II (35%); it was increased only marginally in phase III to 39%, which was still lower than the 46% ADR in the trained group. The trained group had an increase in APP, from 0.72 in Phase I to 0.87 in Phase II and 0.98 in Phase III. For the previously untrained group, there was no change in APP from phase I (0.68) to phase II (0.68), but there was possibly a small increase (to 0.74) in Phase III.
conclusionsThis study provides evidence that improvements in ADR obtained through the endoscopic quality-training program can persist for at least 5 months after completion of the program. It further suggests that a focus on ADR does not lead to a "one and done" phenomenon. The limitations of this study were as follows: single-center setting, and lack of sessile polyp information/standardization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.