Original Research

A Nationwide Survey and Needs Assessment of Colonoscopy Quality Assurance Programs

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

Limitations

This survey was a cross-section of VA sites’ points of contact regarding colonoscopy quality assurance programs, so the results are descriptive in nature. However, the instrument was carefully developed, using both subject matter and survey method expertise. The questionnaire also was refined through pretesting prior to data collection. The initial contact list was found to have errors, and the list had to be updated after launching the survey. Updated information for most of the contacts was available.

Another limitation was the inability to survey nongastroenterologist-run endoscopy centers, because many centers use surgeons or other nongastroenterology providers. The authors speculate that quality monitoring may be less likely to be present at these facilities as they may not be aware of the gastroenterology professional society recommendations. The authors did not require or insist that all questions be answered, so some data were missing from sites. However, 93.7% of respondents completed the entire survey.

Conclusion

The authors have described the status of colonoscopy quality assurance programs across the VA health care system. Many sites are making robust efforts to measure and report quality especially of process measures. However, there are significant time and manual workforce efforts required, and this work is likely associated with the variability in programs. Importantly, ADR, which is the quality metric that has been most strongly associated with risk of colon cancer mortality, is not being measured by 38% of sites.

These results reinforce a critical need for a centralized, automated quality reporting infrastructure to standardize colonoscopy quality reporting, reduce workload, and ensure veterans receive high-quality colonoscopy.

Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the support and feedback of the National Gastroenterology Program Field Advisory Committee for survey development and testing. The authors coordinated the survey through the Salt Lake City Specialty Care Center of Innovation in partnership with the National Gastroenterology Program Office and the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative: Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, Measurement Science Program, QUE15-283. The work also was partially supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health Award UL1TR001067 and Merit Review Award 1 I01 HX001574-01A1 from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research & Development Service of the VA Office of Research and Development.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Are Periodic Endoscopies Useful for Patients Under 40?
Federal Practitioner
Enhanced recovery protocol for colectomy patients reduced hospital stay
Federal Practitioner
Colorectal Screening: Available but Underused
Federal Practitioner
Strollin’ the Colon: A Collaborated Effort to Provide Education and Screening Outreach for the Improvement of Awareness, Access, and Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer
Federal Practitioner
Colonic Diaphragm Disease: An Important NSAID Complication to Know
Federal Practitioner
Molecular Profiles Guide Colorectal Cancer Treatment
Federal Practitioner
In Rare Case Colorectal Cancer Causes Thrombus
Federal Practitioner
Study Reveals Tumor Blood Vessels Cluster in Beltlike Zones
Federal Practitioner
It Pays to Get Screened for Colon Cancer
Federal Practitioner
Right Paraduodenal Hernia
Federal Practitioner

Related Articles