Sustained success in endoscopic performance demonstrated by the Irish National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Programme

Abstract

Background and study aims

The National Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement (NEQI) Programme captures over 94% of endoscopic activity in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), accounting for > 120,000 colonoscopies per annum. The aim of this study was to assess temporal changes in colonoscopy Key Quality Indicators (KQIs) at a national level over a 5-year period among low-, intermediate-, and high-volume endoscopists.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all NEQI colonoscopy episodes occurring between 2016 and 2022, collating colonoscopy KQIs (cecal intubation rate [CIR], comfort score [CS], polyp detection rate [PDR] and sedation use). Endoscopists with 5 consecutive years of activity were defined as low, intermediate, or high activity according to annual procedural volumes.

Results

Over 658,000 colonoscopies were completed by 1240 endoscopists. Workload is disproportionate, with 36% of endoscopists completing 66% of national colonoscopy volume. Low-, intermediate-, and high-activity endoscopists all demonstrated sustained improvements in KQI targets over the study period. Comparing experts (≥ 300 colonoscopies/year) vs non-experts, KQI plateaus were demonstrated for PDR at < 150 colonoscopies per year (34.2% vs 29.6%, P = 0.002), CS at < 200 procedures per year (97.5% vs 94.9%, P < 0.001), and CIR at < 250 colonoscopies per year (94.5% vs 93.4%, P = 0.048).

Conclusions

This study represents the first published endoscopist-level NEQI data demonstrating ongoing KQI improvements for endoscopists at all activity levels. Sustaining this improvement and continuing to capture national endoscopic performance will remain a core role of the Irish NEQI program. Workforce imbalances and minimum annual volumes continue to represent challenges for national endoscopy programs.

Keywords

Quality and logistical aspects - Quality management - Performance and complications - Endoscopy Lower GI Tract

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 02. August 2024

Angenommen nach Revision: 15. Januar 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
20. Januar 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
26. Februar 2025

• References

• 1 Harewood GC, Petersen BT, Ott BJ. Prospective assessment of the impact of feedback on colonoscopy performance. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 24: 313-318
• 2 Lim S, Tritto G, Zeki S. et al. Regular feedback to individual endoscopists is associated with improved adenoma detection rate and other key performance indicators for colonoscopy. Frontline Gastroenterology 2022; 13: 509-516
• 3 Tinmouth J, Sutradhar R, Li Q. et al. A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of an endoscopist audit and feedback report for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2021; 116: 2042-2051
• 4 Rutter MD, Senore C, Bisschops R. et al. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement Initiative: Developing performance measures. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: 30-41
• 5 JAG. Joint Advisory Group on GI Endoscopy. https://www.thejag.org.uk/
• 6 Bretthauer M, Aabakken L, Dekker E. et al. Reporting systems in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Requirements and standards facilitating quality improvement: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy position statement. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: 172-176
• 7 Lee TJ, Siau K, Esmaily S. et al. Development of a national automated endoscopy database: The United Kingdom National Endoscopy Database (NED). United European Gastroenterol J 2019; 7: 798-806
• 8 Matsuda K, Tanaka K, Fujishiro M. et al. Design paper: Japan Endoscopy Database (JED): A prospective, large database project related to gastroenterological endoscopy in Japan. Dig Endosc 2018; 30: 5-19
• 9 de Neree Tot Babberich MPM, Ledeboer M, van Leerdam ME. et al. Dutch Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Audit: automated extraction of colonoscopy data for quality assessment and improvement. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 154-162 e151
• 10 NEQI. Guidelines for the Implementation of the National GI Endoscopy Quality Improvement Programme 2021. https://rcpi.access.preservica.com/uncategorized/IO_52f6c211-b7c6–49bc-a68a-5535a48ffe2a/
• 11 NEQI. 8th NEQI National Data Report 2023. https://rcpi.access.preservica.com/download/file/IO_dc64d6da-aca6–40d5-bf94–1d41d3cc1d7a
• 12 NEQI. 7th NEQI National Data Report - 2016 to 2021. 2022. https://rcpi.access.preservica.com/uncategorized/IO_a879050b-afaa-4356–9008–237237b4342b/
• 13 Rees CJ, Thomas Gibson S, Rutter MD. et al. UK key performance indicators and quality assurance standards for colonoscopy. Gut 2016; 65: 1923-1929
• 14 Saito Y, Kodashima S, Matsuda T. et al. Current status of diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy in Japan: The Japan Endoscopic Database Project. Dig Endosc 2022; 34: 144-152
• 15 Valori RM, Damery S, Gavin DR. et al. A new composite measure of colonoscopy: the Performance Indicator of Colonic Intubation (PICI). Endoscopy 2018; 50: 40-51
• 16 Catlow J, Sharp L, Wagnild J. et al. Nationally automated colonoscopy performance feedback increases polyp detection: The NED APRIQOT randomized controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 22: 1926-1936
• 17 Beaton D, Sharp L, Trudgill NJ. et al. UK endoscopy workload and workforce patterns: is there potential to increase capacity? A BSG analysis of the National Endoscopy Database. Frontline Gastroenterol 2023; 14: 103-110
• 18 Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1795-1803
• 19 Løberg M, Kalager M, Holme Ø. et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer mortality after adenoma removal. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 799-807
• 20 Atkin W, Wooldrage K, Brenner A. et al. Adenoma surveillance and colorectal cancer incidence: a retrospective, multicentre, cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 823-834
• 21 Carter HE, Knowles D, Moroney T. et al. The use of modelling studies to inform planning of health services: case study of rapidly increasing endoscopy services in Australia. BMC Health Serv Res 2019; 19: 608
• 22 van Turenhout ST, Terhaar sive Droste JS, Meijer GA. et al. Anticipating implementation of colorectal cancer screening in The Netherlands: a nation wide survey on endoscopic supply and demand. BMC Cancer 2012; 12: 46
• 23 Gavin DR, Valori RM, Anderson JT. et al. The national colonoscopy audit: a nationwide assessment of the quality and safety of colonoscopy in the UK. Gut 2013; 62: 242-249
• 24 Kaltenbach T, Gawron A, Meyer CS. et al. Adenoma detection rate (ADR) irrespective of indication is comparable to screening ADR: Implications for quality monitoring. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 19: 1883-1889 e1881