Factors Causing Incomplete Colonoscopy Reported by the Endoscopist: A Population-based Study.

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Gastroenterology Nursing Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-28 DOI:10.1097/SGA.0000000000000874
Louise Bang Grode, Lone Dragnes Brix
{"title":"Factors Causing Incomplete Colonoscopy Reported by the Endoscopist: A Population-based Study.","authors":"Louise Bang Grode, Lone Dragnes Brix","doi":"10.1097/SGA.0000000000000874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colonoscopy is a primary diagnostic method for colorectal cancer screening. Ensuring completeness is critical for its effectiveness. The aim of this study is to explores patient and procedure-related contributors to incomplete colonoscopy in a Danish high volume endoscopy unit. A population-based register study was conducted, using data from electronic health records from a Danish hospital was analyzed, covering all colonoscopies performed between July 2015 and August 2019. The primary outcome assessed was the completeness of the index colonoscopy, with incomplete cases further classified based on the causes for incompleteness that were assessed and documented in real-time by the endoscopist. Data also included patient demographics and comorbidities, and profession of the endoscopist. Among 33,128 colonoscopies, prevalence of incomplete colonoscopies was 6.55%, with inadequate bowel preparation as the leading cause (60.3%). Men were more prone to inadequate bowel preparation, while procedural pain, non-passability, and stenosis were associated with women. Physician endoscopists exhibited higher incomplete colonoscopy rates compared to nurse endoscopists, and patients with higher comorbidity scores were more likely to have incomplete colonoscopy. This study highlights the prevalence of incomplete colonoscopy and recognizes modifiable risk factors like inadequate bowel preparation and procedural pain. Findings underscore the need for personalized interventions, stressing ongoing endoscopist education and targeted strategies to improve colonoscopy effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":12666,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Nursing","volume":"48 3","pages":"153-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SGA.0000000000000874","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Colonoscopy is a primary diagnostic method for colorectal cancer screening. Ensuring completeness is critical for its effectiveness. The aim of this study is to explores patient and procedure-related contributors to incomplete colonoscopy in a Danish high volume endoscopy unit. A population-based register study was conducted, using data from electronic health records from a Danish hospital was analyzed, covering all colonoscopies performed between July 2015 and August 2019. The primary outcome assessed was the completeness of the index colonoscopy, with incomplete cases further classified based on the causes for incompleteness that were assessed and documented in real-time by the endoscopist. Data also included patient demographics and comorbidities, and profession of the endoscopist. Among 33,128 colonoscopies, prevalence of incomplete colonoscopies was 6.55%, with inadequate bowel preparation as the leading cause (60.3%). Men were more prone to inadequate bowel preparation, while procedural pain, non-passability, and stenosis were associated with women. Physician endoscopists exhibited higher incomplete colonoscopy rates compared to nurse endoscopists, and patients with higher comorbidity scores were more likely to have incomplete colonoscopy. This study highlights the prevalence of incomplete colonoscopy and recognizes modifiable risk factors like inadequate bowel preparation and procedural pain. Findings underscore the need for personalized interventions, stressing ongoing endoscopist education and targeted strategies to improve colonoscopy effectiveness.

内镜医师报告的导致结肠镜检查不完全的因素:一项基于人群的研究。
结肠镜检查是结直肠癌筛查的主要诊断方法。确保完整性对其有效性至关重要。本研究的目的是探讨患者和程序相关贡献者不完全结肠镜检查在丹麦大容量内窥镜单位。研究人员进行了一项基于人群的登记研究,分析了丹麦一家医院的电子健康记录数据,涵盖了2015年7月至2019年8月期间进行的所有结肠镜检查。评估的主要结果是指数结肠镜检查的完整性,不完整的病例根据不完整的原因进一步分类,由内窥镜医师实时评估和记录。数据还包括患者的人口统计资料和合并症,以及内窥镜医师的职业。在33128例结肠镜检查中,不完全结肠镜检查的患病率为6.55%,其中肠道准备不足是主要原因(60.3%)。男性更容易出现肠道准备不足,而女性更容易出现程序性疼痛、不通畅和狭窄。内科内窥镜医师比护士内窥镜医师表现出更高的不完全结肠镜检查率,且合并症评分较高的患者更有可能出现不完全结肠镜检查。这项研究强调了不完全结肠镜检查的患病率,并认识到可改变的危险因素,如肠道准备不足和手术疼痛。研究结果强调了个性化干预的必要性,强调了持续的内镜医师教育和有针对性的策略来提高结肠镜检查的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gastroenterology Nursing
Gastroenterology Nursing 医学-护理
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
88
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gastroenterology Nursing: The Official Leader in Science and Practice delivers the information nurses need to stay ahead in this specialty. The journal keeps gastroenterology nurses and associates informed of the latest developments in research, evidence-based practice techniques, equipment, diagnostics, and therapy. The only professional, peer-reviewed nursing journal covering this area, Gastroenterology Nursing is an invaluable resource for current SGNA guidelines, new GI procedures, pharmacology, career development, and certification review. Its lively editorial style and illustrations make the journal a pleasure to read and consult. Official Journal of the Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates and Canadian Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信