Wits Donald Gordon Medical Centre, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
S Afr Med J. 2020 Nov 27;110(12):1186-1190. doi: 10.7196/SAMJ.2020.v110i12.14419.
BACKGROUND: In South Africa, there are no national guidelines for the conduct or quality assessment of colonoscopy, the gold standard for investigation and diagnosis of bowel pathology. OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical profile of patients and evaluate the practice of colonoscopy using procedural quality indicators at the Wits Donald Gordon Medical Centre (WDGMC) outpatient endoscopy unit (OEU). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, clinical practice audit of colonoscopies performed on adults (≥18 years of age). A total of 1 643 patients were included in the study and variables that were collected enabled the assessment of adequacy of bowel preparation, length of withdrawal time and calculation of caecal intubation rate (CIR), polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). We stratified PDR and ADR by sex, age, population group, withdrawal time and bowel preparation. CIR, PDR and ADR estimates were compared between patient groups by the χ2 test; Fisher's exact test was used for 2 × 2 tables. A p-value <0.05 was used. Benchmark recommendations by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE)/American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) were used in this audit to assess individual endoscopist performance and that of the endoscopy unit as a whole. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 55.7 (standard deviation (SD) 14.4; range 18 - 91) years, ~60% were female, and the majority (75.5%) were white. Of the outpatients, 77.6% had adequate bowel preparation (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥85%). The CIR was 97.0% overall, and screening colonoscopy was 96.3% (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥90% overall and ≥95% for screening colonoscopies). The median withdrawal time for negative-result screening colonoscopies was 5.7 minutes (interquartile range (IQR) 4.2 - 9.3; range 1.1 - 20.6) (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥ 6minutes), and PDR and ADR were 27.6% and 15.6%, respectively (ASGE/ACG benchmark ADR ≥25%). We demonstrated a 23.7% increase in PDR and 14.1% increase in ADR between scopes that had mean withdrawal times of ≥6 minutes and <6 minutes, respectively. Although the number of black Africans in the study was relatively small, our results showed that they have similar ADRs and PDRs to the white population group, contradicting popular belief. CONCLUSIONS: The WDGMC OEU performed reasonably well against the international guidelines, despite some inadequacy in bowel preparation and lower than recommended median withdrawal times on negative-result colonoscopy. Annual auditing of clinical practice and availability of these data in the public domain will become standard of care, making this audit a baseline for longitudinal observation, assessing the impact of interventions, and contributing to the development of local guidelines.
背景:在南非,尚无针对结肠镜检查(调查和诊断肠道病理的金标准)开展或进行质量评估的国家指南。
目的:描述威特沃特斯兰德大学唐纳德·戈登医学中心(Wits Donald Gordon Medical Centre,WDGMC)门诊内镜科(outpatient endoscopy unit,OEU)行结肠镜检查患者的临床特征,并使用程序质量指标评估其操作实践。
方法:我们对在成年人(≥18 岁)中进行的结肠镜检查进行了前瞻性临床实践审核。共纳入 1643 例患者,收集的变量可评估肠道准备的充分性、退镜时间和盲肠插管率(cecal intubation rate,CIR)、息肉检出率(polyp detection rate,PDR)和腺瘤检出率(adenoma detection rate,ADR)的计算。我们根据性别、年龄、人群组、退镜时间和肠道准备情况对 PDR 和 ADR 进行分层。通过卡方检验比较不同患者组的 CIR、PDR 和 ADR 估计值;2×2 表使用 Fisher 确切检验。p 值<0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。该审核使用美国胃肠内镜学会(American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy,ASGE)/美国胃肠病学会(American College of Gastroenterology,ACG)结直肠癌(colorectal cancer,CRC)工作组的推荐基准来评估个体内镜医师的表现和内镜科的整体表现。
结果:患者的平均年龄为 55.7 岁(标准差(standard deviation,SD)为 14.4;范围 18-91),约 60%为女性,多数(75.5%)为白人。在门诊患者中,77.6%肠道准备充分(ASGE/ACG 基准≥85%)。总体 CIR 为 97.0%,筛查结肠镜检查为 96.3%(ASGE/ACG 基准总体≥90%,筛查结肠镜检查≥95%)。阴性结果筛查结肠镜检查的中位退镜时间为 5.7 分钟(四分位距(interquartile range,IQR)为 4.2-9.3;范围为 1.1-20.6)(ASGE/ACG 基准≥6 分钟),PDR 和 ADR 分别为 27.6%和 15.6%(ASGE/ACG 基准 ADR≥25%)。我们发现,退镜时间≥6 分钟和<6 分钟的结肠镜检查的 PDR 和 ADR 分别增加了 23.7%和 14.1%。尽管研究中黑人非洲人的数量相对较少,但我们的结果表明,他们与白人人群的 ADR 和 PDR 相似,这与普遍看法相矛盾。
结论:尽管肠道准备存在一定不足,阴性结果结肠镜检查的退镜时间低于推荐中位数,但 WDGMC OEU 的操作基本符合国际指南。对临床实践进行年度审核,并将这些数据公开提供,将成为标准护理,使本次审核成为纵向观察的基准,评估干预措施的影响,并为当地指南的制定做出贡献。
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019-11
Am J Gastroenterol. 2019-8
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015-3