A novel digital rectoscope for the triage of lower gastrointestinal symptoms in primary care: a prospective multicentre feasibility study
BACKGROUNDAccess to community rectoscopy might help to ease the burden on hospital services and reduce costs for the NHS. To assess this, a prospective multicentre observational phase I feasibility study of a novel digital rectoscope and telestration software for the triage of lower gastrointestinal...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BJGP open 2022-09, Vol.6 (3), p.BJGPO.2022.0036 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | BACKGROUNDAccess to community rectoscopy might help to ease the burden on hospital services and reduce costs for the NHS. To assess this, a prospective multicentre observational phase I feasibility study of a novel digital rectoscope and telestration software for the triage of lower gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms was undertaken. AIMTo determine if digital rectoscopy is feasible, acceptable, and clinically safe. DESIGN & SETTINGEvaluation of clinician case reports and patient questionnaires from patients recruited from five primary care centres. METHODAdults meeting 2-week wait (2WW) criteria for suspected lower GI cancer, suspected new diagnosis, or flare-up of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) were enrolled. Examinations were performed by primary care practitioners using the LumenEye rectoscope. The CHiP platform allowed immediate remote review by secondary care. A prospective analysis was performed of patient and clinician experiences, diagnostic accuracy, and cost. RESULTSA total of 114 patients were recruited and 110 underwent the procedure (46 [42%] females and 64 [58%] males). No serious adverse events were reported. Eighty-two (74.5%) patients reported that examination was more comfortable than expected, while 104 (94.5%) felt the intervention was most convenient if delivered in the community. Clinicians were confident of their assessment in 100 (87.7%) examinations. Forty-eight (42.1%) patients subsequently underwent colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or computed tomography virtual colonoscopy (CTVC). The overall sensitivity and specificity of LumenEye in identifying rectal pathology was 90.0% and 88.9%. It was 100% and 100% for cancer, and 83.3% and 97.8% for polyps. Following LumenEye examination, 19 (17.3%) patients were discharged, with projected savings of 11 305 GBP. CONCLUSIONDigital rectoscopy in primary care is safe, acceptable, and can reduce referrals. A phase III randomised controlled trial is indicated to define its utility in reducing the burden on hospital diagnostic services. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2398-3795 2398-3795 |
DOI: | 10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0036 |