Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Endosc Int Open. 2019 Nov;7(11):E1344-E1354. doi: 10.1055/a-0895-5410. Epub 2019 Oct 22.

Prevalence of 'one and done' in adenoma detection rates: results from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.

Author information

1
Department of Intramural Research, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, United States.
2
Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States.
3
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, United States.
4
Section of Gastroenterology, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States.
5
Department of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States.
6
Department of Cancer Control, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, United States.

Abstract

Background and study aims  Adenoma detection rate (ADR), the proportion of an endoscopist's screening colonoscopies in which at least one adenoma is found, is an established quality metric. Several publications have suggested that a technique referred to as "one and done," where less attention is paid to additional polyp detection following discovery of one likely adenoma, may be occurring 1 2 3 . To investigate whether this practice occurs and provide additional context to the significance of ADR, we examined ADR by single and multiple adenomas in the statewide New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry (NHCR). Patients and methods  A total of 25,324 NHCR patients receiving screening colonoscopies between 2009 and 2014 by 69 endoscopists were analyzed. ADR was dichotomized into high (≥ 20 %) and low (< 20 %) based on 2006 recommended targets in place during the time of the study. ADR-plus (the average number of adenomas in colonoscopies with > 1 adenoma) was dichotomized at mean values into high (≥ 1.5) and low (< 1.5). As suggested by others, a high ADR but low ADR-plus was used to indicate the "one and done" approach. Results  Among endoscopists with an ADR ≥ 20 %, only 5 (7.2 %) had low ADR-plus values and were classified as "one and done." Results for serrated polyp detection were similar. ADR and ADR-plus decreased monotonically with increasing years since residency ( P values for trend ADR = 0.02; ADR-plus = 0.003) after adjusting for patient risk factors. Conclusion  "One and done" infrequently occurred among endoscopists with high ADR in a large statewide registry. The need to replace ADR with other polyp detection metrics (such as ADR-plus) to accurately ascertain performance quality is not supported by these findings.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center