Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2014

01-05-2014

Differences in colonoscopy technique impact quality

Authors: S. Kravochuck, R. Gao, J. Church

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Colonoscopists differ in skill, technique, and attitude in relation to the examination. These differences have a potential impact on the quality of the examination and the risk of complications. This study aimed to document differences in technique between individual colonoscopists and to explore some possible consequences to the patient and the examination.

Methods

This prospective, comparative study analyzed 10 individual endoscopists practicing in outpatient endoscopy clinics at a major medical center. Consecutive patients presenting for elective outpatient colonoscopy were included in the study. Examinations were observed, and techniques used during scope insertion and withdrawal were recorded. The type and dose of medication, the pain score recorded by the endoscopy nurses (scale of 1–10), and the incidence of hypotension and hypoxia were noted.

Results

The study involved 245 patients (129 men and 116 women) with a mean age of 59.5 years. The number of colonoscopies per examiner ranged from 12 to 31, with nine tenths of the examiners performing more than 20 colonoscopies. Completion rates ranged from 82.6 to 100 %; the withdrawal time averages ranged from 3.5 to 21.7 min; and the average number of techniques used ranged from one per four exams to three per exam. The average pain score per endoscopist ranged from 2.1 to 4.3, and the percentage of patients with either hypoxia or hypotension ranged from 11.5 to 85.0 %. A sedation/analgesia product (SAP) was derived by multiplying the mean dose of versed by the mean dose of meperidine. Regression analysis showed significant relationships between the number of techniques used and the levels of pain (R 2 = 0.395) and hypoxia/hypotension (R 2 = 0.513). The findings showed that SAP was significantly associated with hypoxia/hypotension (R 2 = 0.826) but not pain (R 2 = 0.01).

Conclusions

Use of ancillary techniques for colonoscope insertion minimizes pain, narcotic use, and hypoxia/hypotension. The product of benzodiazepine dose and narcotic dose is a good way of assessing sedative effect.
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Rex DK, Khalfan HK (2005) Sedation and the technical performance of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 15:661–672PubMedCrossRef Rex DK, Khalfan HK (2005) Sedation and the technical performance of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 15:661–672PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference McQuaid KR, Laine L (2008) A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 67:910–923PubMedCrossRef McQuaid KR, Laine L (2008) A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials of moderate sedation for routine endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc 67:910–923PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Leung FW, Aharonian S, Guth PH, Jackson G, Chu SK, Nguyen BD, Simpson P (2008) Unsedated colonoscopy: time to revisit this option? J Fam Pract 57:E1–E4PubMed Leung FW, Aharonian S, Guth PH, Jackson G, Chu SK, Nguyen BD, Simpson P (2008) Unsedated colonoscopy: time to revisit this option? J Fam Pract 57:E1–E4PubMed
5.
go back to reference Petrini JL, Egan JV, Hahn WV (2009) Unsedated colonoscopy: patient characteristics and satisfaction in a community-based endoscopy unit. Gastrointest Endosc 69:567–572PubMedCrossRef Petrini JL, Egan JV, Hahn WV (2009) Unsedated colonoscopy: patient characteristics and satisfaction in a community-based endoscopy unit. Gastrointest Endosc 69:567–572PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rex DK, Deenadayalu VP, Eid E, Imperiale TF, Walker JA, Sandhu K et al (2009) Endoscopist-directed administration of propofol: a worldwide safety experience. Gastroenterology 137:1229–1237PubMedCrossRef Rex DK, Deenadayalu VP, Eid E, Imperiale TF, Walker JA, Sandhu K et al (2009) Endoscopist-directed administration of propofol: a worldwide safety experience. Gastroenterology 137:1229–1237PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Singh H, Poluha W, Cheung M, Choptain N, Baron KI, Taback SP (2008) Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD006268PubMed Singh H, Poluha W, Cheung M, Choptain N, Baron KI, Taback SP (2008) Propofol for sedation during colonoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD006268PubMed
8.
go back to reference Church JM (1993) Ancillary colonoscope insertion techniques: an evaluation. Surg Endosc 7:191–193PubMedCrossRef Church JM (1993) Ancillary colonoscope insertion techniques: an evaluation. Surg Endosc 7:191–193PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Webb WA (1991) Colonoscoping the “difficult” colon. Am Surg 57:178–182PubMed Webb WA (1991) Colonoscoping the “difficult” colon. Am Surg 57:178–182PubMed
10.
go back to reference Waye JD, Yessayan SA, Lewis BS, Fabry TL (1991) The technique of abdominal pressure in total colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 37:147–151PubMedCrossRef Waye JD, Yessayan SA, Lewis BS, Fabry TL (1991) The technique of abdominal pressure in total colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 37:147–151PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Heigh RI, DiBaise JK, Prechel JA, Horn BJ, San Miguel S, Heigh EG, Leighton JA, Edgelow CJ, Fleischer DE (2009) Use of an electromagnetic colonoscope to assess maneuvers associated with cecal intubation. BMC Gastroenterol 9:24PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Heigh RI, DiBaise JK, Prechel JA, Horn BJ, San Miguel S, Heigh EG, Leighton JA, Edgelow CJ, Fleischer DE (2009) Use of an electromagnetic colonoscope to assess maneuvers associated with cecal intubation. BMC Gastroenterol 9:24PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Church JM (2002) Warm water irrigation for dealing with spasm during colonoscopy: simple, inexpensive, and effective. Gastrointest Endosc 56:672–674PubMedCrossRef Church JM (2002) Warm water irrigation for dealing with spasm during colonoscopy: simple, inexpensive, and effective. Gastrointest Endosc 56:672–674PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shah SG, Brooker JC, Williams CB, Thapar C, Suzuki N, Saunders BP (2002) The variable stiffness colonoscope: assessment of efficacy by magnetic endoscope imaging. Gastrointest Endosc 56:195–201PubMedCrossRef Shah SG, Brooker JC, Williams CB, Thapar C, Suzuki N, Saunders BP (2002) The variable stiffness colonoscope: assessment of efficacy by magnetic endoscope imaging. Gastrointest Endosc 56:195–201PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Differences in colonoscopy technique impact quality
Authors
S. Kravochuck
R. Gao
J. Church
Publication date
01-05-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3355-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2014 Go to the issue