Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative

Background Despite guidelines, physicians tend to perform postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies too frequently. The objective of the study was to determine the baseline compliance rate with postpolypectomy guidelines in our unit and to determine the influence of a continuous quality improvement...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2006, Vol.63 (1), p.97-103
Hauptverfasser: Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD, Super, Dennis M., MD, Feldman, Edward S., MD, Mullen, Kevin D., MD, Ferguson, D.R., MD, McCullough, Arthur J., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 103
container_issue 1
container_start_page 97
container_title Gastrointestinal endoscopy
container_volume 63
creator Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD
Super, Dennis M., MD
Feldman, Edward S., MD
Mullen, Kevin D., MD
Ferguson, D.R., MD
McCullough, Arthur J., MD
description Background Despite guidelines, physicians tend to perform postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies too frequently. The objective of the study was to determine the baseline compliance rate with postpolypectomy guidelines in our unit and to determine the influence of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) intervention on improving the compliance rate and on decreasing the potential additional costs because of scheduling of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies earlier than indicated. Methods This was a single-arm, pretest-posttest designed study at a tertiary care, academic medical center. The medical records of all patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy in our unit retrospectively during 6 months preceding (baseline period) and prospectively for 6 months after an intervention (postintervention period) were reviewed for patient demographics, colonoscopy findings, and scheduling of repeat colonoscopy. Three components, (1) distribution of a wallet-size card with a summary of postpolypectomy guidelines to all endoscopists, (2) placement of guideline charts near computers used for typing endoscopy reports, and (3) distribution and reinforcement of the guidelines in a monthly continuous quality improvement meeting. Compliance rates, mean times to repeat colonoscopy, and additional costs from surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than indicated were compared between the two periods. Results There were 278 patients in the baseline period and 242 in the postintervention period, with similar patient and polyp characteristics. After the intervention, compliance rate with guidelines improved from 57.2% to 81% ( p < 0.001). The mean time to repeat colonoscopy increased from 4.5 to 5.2 years ( p = 0.003) (i.e., a 14% reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies performed per year). This would result in a reduction of a total of 73 surveillance colonoscopies per year in our unit, with a projected cost savings of $171,331 per year (cost of a colonoscopy assumed at $2347). The limitation of the study was possible enhanced performance secondary to being observed (Hawthorne effect). Because there were more than one intervention used, we do not know which one is more effective. Conclusions Relatively simple and easy to implement quality improvement initiatives can significantly enhance compliance with postpolypectomy guidelines and result in cost savings because of a reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveilla
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.048
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67592648</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0016510705027574</els_id><sourcerecordid>67592648</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-e56c4de4daaa2f767ed8195bf54834a184bbd7225358f5587d303c1b6aab1c913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Uk2LFDEUDKK44-gP8CK56K3HpJN0uhUWZPFjYcGDeg7p5PX4xv7aTnqk_4M_2vTMwIIHT4Gkql6l6hHykrMdZ7x4e9jtEXY5Y2rHyh2T5SOy4azSWaF19ZhsWAJlijN9RZ6FcGCMlbngT8kVL4TWIpcb8ue2G6fhiP2euqEbW7S9A_ob4086DiGOQ7uM4OLQLTTM0xGwbU-I_YweWuwhvKO2p9hHSK99xKG3LQ1x9gudwyprk3C67-dhDvR-ti3GheJpKnSJkbgY0UY8wnPypLFtgBeXc0t-fPr4_eZLdvf18-3Nh7vMSVHEDFThpAfprbV5owsNvuSVqhslSyEtL2Vde53nSqiyUarUXjDheF1YW3NXcbElb866ycT9DCGaDoOD9WuQXJpCqyovktiW8DPQTUMIEzRmnLCz02I4M2sF5mBSBWatwLDSsBPn1UV8rjvwD4xL5gnw-gKwwdm2mVKgGB5wWipV6VXo_RkHKYojwmSCQ0jhe5xSJcYP-F8b1_-wXaoL08BfsEA4DPOUmgqGm5AbZr6tu7KuClMs10pL8RcbP733</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67592648</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD ; Super, Dennis M., MD ; Feldman, Edward S., MD ; Mullen, Kevin D., MD ; Ferguson, D.R., MD ; McCullough, Arthur J., MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD ; Super, Dennis M., MD ; Feldman, Edward S., MD ; Mullen, Kevin D., MD ; Ferguson, D.R., MD ; McCullough, Arthur J., MD</creatorcontrib><description>Background Despite guidelines, physicians tend to perform postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies too frequently. The objective of the study was to determine the baseline compliance rate with postpolypectomy guidelines in our unit and to determine the influence of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) intervention on improving the compliance rate and on decreasing the potential additional costs because of scheduling of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies earlier than indicated. Methods This was a single-arm, pretest-posttest designed study at a tertiary care, academic medical center. The medical records of all patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy in our unit retrospectively during 6 months preceding (baseline period) and prospectively for 6 months after an intervention (postintervention period) were reviewed for patient demographics, colonoscopy findings, and scheduling of repeat colonoscopy. Three components, (1) distribution of a wallet-size card with a summary of postpolypectomy guidelines to all endoscopists, (2) placement of guideline charts near computers used for typing endoscopy reports, and (3) distribution and reinforcement of the guidelines in a monthly continuous quality improvement meeting. Compliance rates, mean times to repeat colonoscopy, and additional costs from surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than indicated were compared between the two periods. Results There were 278 patients in the baseline period and 242 in the postintervention period, with similar patient and polyp characteristics. After the intervention, compliance rate with guidelines improved from 57.2% to 81% ( p &lt; 0.001). The mean time to repeat colonoscopy increased from 4.5 to 5.2 years ( p = 0.003) (i.e., a 14% reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies performed per year). This would result in a reduction of a total of 73 surveillance colonoscopies per year in our unit, with a projected cost savings of $171,331 per year (cost of a colonoscopy assumed at $2347). The limitation of the study was possible enhanced performance secondary to being observed (Hawthorne effect). Because there were more than one intervention used, we do not know which one is more effective. Conclusions Relatively simple and easy to implement quality improvement initiatives can significantly enhance compliance with postpolypectomy guidelines and result in cost savings because of a reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than recommended guidelines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-5107</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.048</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16377324</identifier><identifier>CODEN: GAENBQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Colonoscopy - economics ; Digestive system. Abdomen ; Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic ; Endoscopy ; Gastroenterology and Hepatology ; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen ; Humans ; Intestinal Polyps - surgery ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Postoperative Care ; Postoperative Complications - diagnosis ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Prospective Studies ; Retrospective Studies</subject><ispartof>Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2006, Vol.63 (1), p.97-103</ispartof><rights>American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>2006 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>2006 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-e56c4de4daaa2f767ed8195bf54834a184bbd7225358f5587d303c1b6aab1c913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-e56c4de4daaa2f767ed8195bf54834a184bbd7225358f5587d303c1b6aab1c913</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.048$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,4025,27928,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=17455978$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16377324$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Super, Dennis M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feldman, Edward S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mullen, Kevin D., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, D.R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCullough, Arthur J., MD</creatorcontrib><title>Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative</title><title>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</title><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><description>Background Despite guidelines, physicians tend to perform postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies too frequently. The objective of the study was to determine the baseline compliance rate with postpolypectomy guidelines in our unit and to determine the influence of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) intervention on improving the compliance rate and on decreasing the potential additional costs because of scheduling of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies earlier than indicated. Methods This was a single-arm, pretest-posttest designed study at a tertiary care, academic medical center. The medical records of all patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy in our unit retrospectively during 6 months preceding (baseline period) and prospectively for 6 months after an intervention (postintervention period) were reviewed for patient demographics, colonoscopy findings, and scheduling of repeat colonoscopy. Three components, (1) distribution of a wallet-size card with a summary of postpolypectomy guidelines to all endoscopists, (2) placement of guideline charts near computers used for typing endoscopy reports, and (3) distribution and reinforcement of the guidelines in a monthly continuous quality improvement meeting. Compliance rates, mean times to repeat colonoscopy, and additional costs from surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than indicated were compared between the two periods. Results There were 278 patients in the baseline period and 242 in the postintervention period, with similar patient and polyp characteristics. After the intervention, compliance rate with guidelines improved from 57.2% to 81% ( p &lt; 0.001). The mean time to repeat colonoscopy increased from 4.5 to 5.2 years ( p = 0.003) (i.e., a 14% reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies performed per year). This would result in a reduction of a total of 73 surveillance colonoscopies per year in our unit, with a projected cost savings of $171,331 per year (cost of a colonoscopy assumed at $2347). The limitation of the study was possible enhanced performance secondary to being observed (Hawthorne effect). Because there were more than one intervention used, we do not know which one is more effective. Conclusions Relatively simple and easy to implement quality improvement initiatives can significantly enhance compliance with postpolypectomy guidelines and result in cost savings because of a reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than recommended guidelines.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - economics</subject><subject>Digestive system. Abdomen</subject><subject>Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</subject><subject>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intestinal Polyps - surgery</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Postoperative Care</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - diagnosis</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><issn>0016-5107</issn><issn>1097-6779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Uk2LFDEUDKK44-gP8CK56K3HpJN0uhUWZPFjYcGDeg7p5PX4xv7aTnqk_4M_2vTMwIIHT4Gkql6l6hHykrMdZ7x4e9jtEXY5Y2rHyh2T5SOy4azSWaF19ZhsWAJlijN9RZ6FcGCMlbngT8kVL4TWIpcb8ue2G6fhiP2euqEbW7S9A_ob4086DiGOQ7uM4OLQLTTM0xGwbU-I_YweWuwhvKO2p9hHSK99xKG3LQ1x9gudwyprk3C67-dhDvR-ti3GheJpKnSJkbgY0UY8wnPypLFtgBeXc0t-fPr4_eZLdvf18-3Nh7vMSVHEDFThpAfprbV5owsNvuSVqhslSyEtL2Vde53nSqiyUarUXjDheF1YW3NXcbElb866ycT9DCGaDoOD9WuQXJpCqyovktiW8DPQTUMIEzRmnLCz02I4M2sF5mBSBWatwLDSsBPn1UV8rjvwD4xL5gnw-gKwwdm2mVKgGB5wWipV6VXo_RkHKYojwmSCQ0jhe5xSJcYP-F8b1_-wXaoL08BfsEA4DPOUmgqGm5AbZr6tu7KuClMs10pL8RcbP733</recordid><startdate>2006</startdate><enddate>2006</enddate><creator>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD</creator><creator>Super, Dennis M., MD</creator><creator>Feldman, Edward S., MD</creator><creator>Mullen, Kevin D., MD</creator><creator>Ferguson, D.R., MD</creator><creator>McCullough, Arthur J., MD</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2006</creationdate><title>Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative</title><author>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD ; Super, Dennis M., MD ; Feldman, Edward S., MD ; Mullen, Kevin D., MD ; Ferguson, D.R., MD ; McCullough, Arthur J., MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-e56c4de4daaa2f767ed8195bf54834a184bbd7225358f5587d303c1b6aab1c913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - economics</topic><topic>Digestive system. Abdomen</topic><topic>Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</topic><topic>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intestinal Polyps - surgery</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Postoperative Care</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - diagnosis</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Super, Dennis M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feldman, Edward S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mullen, Kevin D., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferguson, D.R., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCullough, Arthur J., MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sanaka, Madhusudhan R., MD</au><au>Super, Dennis M., MD</au><au>Feldman, Edward S., MD</au><au>Mullen, Kevin D., MD</au><au>Ferguson, D.R., MD</au><au>McCullough, Arthur J., MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative</atitle><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><date>2006</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>97</spage><epage>103</epage><pages>97-103</pages><issn>0016-5107</issn><eissn>1097-6779</eissn><coden>GAENBQ</coden><abstract>Background Despite guidelines, physicians tend to perform postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies too frequently. The objective of the study was to determine the baseline compliance rate with postpolypectomy guidelines in our unit and to determine the influence of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) intervention on improving the compliance rate and on decreasing the potential additional costs because of scheduling of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies earlier than indicated. Methods This was a single-arm, pretest-posttest designed study at a tertiary care, academic medical center. The medical records of all patients who underwent colonoscopy with polypectomy in our unit retrospectively during 6 months preceding (baseline period) and prospectively for 6 months after an intervention (postintervention period) were reviewed for patient demographics, colonoscopy findings, and scheduling of repeat colonoscopy. Three components, (1) distribution of a wallet-size card with a summary of postpolypectomy guidelines to all endoscopists, (2) placement of guideline charts near computers used for typing endoscopy reports, and (3) distribution and reinforcement of the guidelines in a monthly continuous quality improvement meeting. Compliance rates, mean times to repeat colonoscopy, and additional costs from surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than indicated were compared between the two periods. Results There were 278 patients in the baseline period and 242 in the postintervention period, with similar patient and polyp characteristics. After the intervention, compliance rate with guidelines improved from 57.2% to 81% ( p &lt; 0.001). The mean time to repeat colonoscopy increased from 4.5 to 5.2 years ( p = 0.003) (i.e., a 14% reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies performed per year). This would result in a reduction of a total of 73 surveillance colonoscopies per year in our unit, with a projected cost savings of $171,331 per year (cost of a colonoscopy assumed at $2347). The limitation of the study was possible enhanced performance secondary to being observed (Hawthorne effect). Because there were more than one intervention used, we do not know which one is more effective. Conclusions Relatively simple and easy to implement quality improvement initiatives can significantly enhance compliance with postpolypectomy guidelines and result in cost savings because of a reduction in the number of postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopies being scheduled earlier than recommended guidelines.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>16377324</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.048</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-5107
ispartof Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2006, Vol.63 (1), p.97-103
issn 0016-5107
1097-6779
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67592648
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Colonoscopy - economics
Digestive system. Abdomen
Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic
Endoscopy
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen
Humans
Intestinal Polyps - surgery
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Postoperative Care
Postoperative Complications - diagnosis
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Prospective Studies
Retrospective Studies
title Improving compliance with postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines: an interventional study using a continuous quality improvement initiative
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T13%3A50%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Improving%20compliance%20with%20postpolypectomy%20surveillance%20guidelines:%20an%20interventional%20study%20using%20a%20continuous%20quality%20improvement%20initiative&rft.jtitle=Gastrointestinal%20endoscopy&rft.au=Sanaka,%20Madhusudhan%20R.,%20MD&rft.date=2006&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=97&rft.epage=103&rft.pages=97-103&rft.issn=0016-5107&rft.eissn=1097-6779&rft.coden=GAENBQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gie.2005.08.048&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67592648%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67592648&rft_id=info:pmid/16377324&rft_els_id=S0016510705027574&rfr_iscdi=true