Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31485995›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2020

Anesthesia Assistance in Screening Colonoscopy and Adenoma Detection Rate Among Trainees.

Anna Krigel, Anish Patel, Jeremy Kaplan, Xiao-Fei Kong, Reuben Garcia-Carrasquillo, Benjamin Lebwohl, Suneeta Krishnareddy

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna KrigelDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA. aek2155@cumc.columbia.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9791-6490
Anish PatelDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Jeremy KaplanDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Xiao-Fei KongDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Reuben Garcia-CarrasquilloDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Benjamin LebwohlDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Suneeta KrishnareddyDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Columbia University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsThe use of anesthesia assistance (AA) for screening colonoscopy has been increasing substantially over the past decade, raising concerns about procedure safety and cost without demonstrating a proven improvement in overall quality indicators such as adenoma detection rate (ADR). The effect of AA on ADR has not been extensively studied among trainees learning colonoscopy. We aimed to determine whether type of sedation used during screening colonoscopy affects trainee ADR.

methodsUsing the electronic endoscopy databases of two hospitals in our medical center, we identified colonoscopies performed by 15 trainees from 2014 through 2018, including all screening examinations in which the cecum was reached. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with adenoma detection.

resultsWe identified 1420 unique patients who underwent screening colonoscopy by a trainee meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these, 459 (32.3%) were performed with AA. Overall trainee ADR was 39.6%, with ADR increasing from 35.0% in year one of training to 42.8% in year three (p = 0.047). ADR for cases with AA was 37.9%, while ADR for conscious sedation cases was 32.0% (p = 0.374). Despite this 5.9% absolute difference, the use of AA was not associated with finding an adenoma on multivariable analysis when controlling for patient age, sex, smoking status, body mass index, trainee year of training, mean withdrawal time, supervising attending ADR, and bowel preparation quality (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.67-1.09).

conclusionsDespite providing the ability to more consistently sedate patients, the use of AA did not affect trainee ADR. These results on trainee ADR and sedation type suggest that the overall lack of association between AA use and ADR is applicable to the trainee setting.

Indexed as

AdenomaAgedAged, 80 and overAnesthesiaClinical CompetenceColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsDatabases, FactualEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedAdenoma density under the curveColonoscopyPropofolSedationTrainee

Identifiers

PMID31485995
OpenAlexW2971627522

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.