Clinical—Alimentary TractAnalysis of Administrative Data Finds Endoscopist Quality Measures Associated With Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer
Section snippets
Overview of Study Design
This is an observational study of all individuals diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2005, with a known site of primary who underwent a colonoscopy within 36 months of diagnosis.
Data Sources
We used 5 data sources.
- 1
The Ontario Cancer Registry includes information on all incident cancers diagnosed since 1964 in Ontario and is estimated to be more than 95% complete.12
- 2
The Ontario Health Insurance Plan database contains information on claims billed by physicians for services, permitting
Results
Of the 34,312 patients in Ontario diagnosed with CRC in our study period, 14,064 had a complete colonoscopy within 36 months of diagnosis and met all study criteria. Of these, 1260 (9.0%) were considered to have a new or missed cancer (PCCRC). Overall, 61.1% of patients with CRC were diagnosed with a distal CRC. Patients with proximal CRC were more likely to have a PCCRC than patients with distal CRC (676 patients with proximal cancer had a PCCRC [12.4%] vs 584 patients [6.8%] with distal
Discussion
Colonoscopy is a common procedure and a key component of CRC control strategies at the population level. Previous studies have documented variation in performance of colonoscopy; adenoma detection rate, for example, is known to vary between endoscopists19, 24 and is associated with factors such as scope withdrawal time,8 a proxy for careful colonoscopy technique. Variation in the quality of colonoscopy likely has an important impact on effectiveness and patient outcomes, and this has led to a
References (36)
- et al.
Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology
Gastroenterology
(2008) - et al.
Colorectal cancer screening by primary care physicians: recommendations and practices, 2006–2007
Am J Prev Med
(2009) - et al.
Colonoscopy: practice variation among 69 hospital-based endoscopists
Gastrointest Endosc
(2003) - et al.
An application of capture recapture methods to the estimation of completeness of cancer registration
J Clin Epidemiol
(1988) - et al.
Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population-based analysis
Gastroenterology
(2007) - et al.
A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation
J Chron Dis
(1987) - et al.
Endoscopist specialty is associated with incident colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
(2010) - et al.
Variation in polyp detection rates at screening colonoscopy
Gastrointest Endosc
(2009) - et al.
Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable
Gastrointest Endosc
(2007) - et al.
Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice
Gastroenterology
(1997)
Rates of new or missed colorectal cancers after colonoscopy and their risk factors: a population-based analysis
Gastroenterology
Polypectomy rate as a surrogate marker for adenoma detection in quality measurement for colonoscopy
Gastrointest Endosc
Value driven healthcare quality standards
American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009
Am J Gastroenterol
Endoscopist can be more powerful than age and male gender in predicting adenoma detection at colonoscopy
Am J Gastroenterol
Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy
N Engl J Med
Cited by (420)
Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: A population-based cohort study of fecal occult blood test-positive colonoscopies
2024, Clinics and Research in Hepatology and GastroenterologyThe impact of EndoCuff-assisted colonoscopy on the polyp detection rate: A cross-over randomized back-to-back study
2024, Arab Journal of GastroenterologyDevelopment and Validation of an Automated, Real-time Adenoma Detection Rate and Colonoscopy Quality Metrics Calculator
2024, Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal EndoscopyComparison of Outcomes in Below-Knee Amputation Between Vascular, General, and Orthopedic Surgeons
2023, Journal of Surgical ResearchBig data approach in the field of gastric and colorectal cancer research
2024, Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)
Conflicts of interest The authors disclose no conflicts.
Funding of interest Supported by an American College of Gastroenterology Cancer Prevention Action Plan Grant, the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Cancer Care Ontario and by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. N.N.B. holds the Cancer Care Ontario Health Services Research Chair and an Early Researchers Award from the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation. The funding sources played no role in design, conduct, or reporting of this study. The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences or the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is intended or should be inferred.