Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25869388›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2015

Physician report cards and implementing standards of practice are both significantly associated with improved screening colonoscopy quality.

Rajesh N Keswani, Rena Yadlapati, Kristine M Gleason, Jody D Ciolino, Michael Manka, Kevin J O'Leary, Cynthia Barnard, John E Pandolfino

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Adequacy of EGD Reporting: a Review of 100 Reports from 100 Endoscopists.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Review
  12. Development of an automated ERCP Quality Report Card using structured data fields.Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Nationwide Survey and Needs Assessment of Colonoscopy Quality Assurance Programs in the VA.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Rajesh N KeswaniDivision of Gastroenterology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Rena YadlapatiDivision of Gastroenterology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Kristine M GleasonDepartment of Quality, Northwestern HealthCare, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Jody D CiolinoDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Michael MankaDivision of Gastroenterology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Kevin J O'LearyDepartment of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Cynthia Barnard1] Department of Quality, Northwestern HealthCare, Chicago, Illinois, USA [2] Center for Healthcare Studies, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
John E PandolfinoDivision of Gastroenterology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAdenoma-detection rates (ADRs) are associated with decreased interval colorectal cancer (CRC) rates and CRC mortality; quality improvement strategies focus on improving physician ADRs. The objective of this study was to examine the sequential effect of physician report cards and implementing institutional standards of practice (SOP) on ADRs.

methodsColonoscopy metrics were prospectively evaluated at a single academic medical center over a 23-month period (November 2012 to October 2014). ADRs were evaluated over three time periods-Period 1: Before initial report card distribution or SOP (November 2012 to March 2013); Period 2: After individualized report card distribution detailing physician and institutional ADRs (April 2013 to March 2014); Period 3: After second report card and SOP implementation (April 2014 to October 2014). The SOP required physicians to have a minimum 5-min withdrawal time in normal colonoscopies (WT) and an ADR minimum of 20%; those who did not meet benchmarks would require further training or endoscopy block time alterations. Only endoscopists averaging >15 colonoscopies/month were included in this analysis.

resultsTwenty endoscopists met the inclusion criteria, performing 12,894 screening colonoscopies over the 23-month period. Following report card distribution, physician ADRs increased by 3% (P<0.001). SOP implementation resulted in a further significant increase in mean physician ADR of 8% (P<0.0001). Overall, mean ADR increased by 11% from Period 1 to Period 3 (P<0.0001). All physicians met the minimum 20% ADR benchmark during Period 3. Although ADRs significantly correlated with WT overall (r=0.45; 95% CI 0.01, 0.75; P=0.04), mean WT did not significantly increase from Period 1 to Period 3.

conclusionsOur data suggest that distributing colonoscopy quality report cards resulted in a significant ADR improvement. Further, we report evidence that implementing SOP significantly improved ADRs beyond report card distribution and resulted in all endoscopists meeting minimum benchmarks. This suggests that report cards and SOPs may have an additive effect in improving colonoscopy quality, and their implementation in endoscopy labs should be encouraged.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceQuality of Health CareAcademic Medical CentersAdenomaBenchmarkingColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisOrganizational PolicyPractice Guidelines as TopicProspective StudiesQuality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID25869388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.