Dataset Information

Evaluation of Performance in Colon Capsule Endoscopy Reading by Endoscopy Nurses.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although there are papers reporting on the accuracy of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) compared with colonoscopy (CS), there are few reports on the detection rates of significant lesions by endoscopy nurses. We previously reported no significant difference in the detection rates for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) images among two well-trained physicians and one expert nurse.

Objective

To evaluate the reading time and detection rate of the significant lesions of CCE images among novice and trained expert endoscopy nurses and novice physicians.

Methods

CCE videos of 20 consecutive patients who performed both CCE and CS with clinically significant localized lesions were selected. Two trained expert endoscopy nurses, untrained two novice physicians, and novice three endoscopy nurses reviewed CCE videos. The detection rate of the lesions and reading time were compared among the three groups and were evaluated by comparison between the first and the second 10 videos.

Results

The median reading time was the shortest (19 min) in the trained expert endoscopy nurses and the longest (45 min) in the novice nurses. The number of thumbnails tended to be more in the trained expert endoscopy nurses in the first 10-video reading. Although the detection rates of small polyps (<5 mm) were significantly lower (46.5%, p=0.025) in the novice nurses compared to the others, they were improved (35.2% to 63.5%, p=0.015) in the second 10 videos. The detection rates of tumor lesions by either one of two trained expert endoscopy nurses were higher compared to those by each novice physician.

Conclusions

The trained expert endoscopy nurses for CCE reading can reduce physician's time and improve the diagnostic yield.

SUBMITTER: Handa Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8100384 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To assess the cleansing efficacy and safety of a new Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) bowel preparation regimen.This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two CCE regimens. Subjects were asymptomatic and average risk for colorectal cancer. The second generation CCE system (PillCam® COLON 2; Medtronic, Yoqneam, Israel) was utilized. Preparation regimens differed in the 1st and 2nd boosts with the Study regimen using oral sulfate solution (89 mL) with diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution ("diatrizoate solution") (boost 1 = 60 mL, boost 2 = 30 mL) and the Control regimen oral sulfate solution (89 mL) alone. The primary outcome was overall and segmental colon cleansing. Secondary outcomes included safety, polyp detection, colonic transit, CCE completion and capsule excretion ? 12 h.Both regimens had similar cleansing efficacy for the whole colon (Adequate: Study = 75.9%, Control = 77.3%; P = 0.88) and individual segments. In the Study group, CCE completion was superior (Study = 90.9%, Control = 76.9%; P = 0.048) and colonic transit was more often < 40 min (Study = 21.8%, Control = 4%; P = 0.0073). More Study regimen subjects experienced adverse events (Study = 19.4%, Control = 3.4%; P = 0.0061), and this difference did not appear related to diatrizoate solution. Adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature and no serious adverse events related either to the bowel preparation regimen or the capsule were observed. There was a trend toward higher polyp detection with the Study regimen, but this did not achieve statistical significance for any size category. Mean transit time through the entire gastrointestinal tract, from ingestion to excretion, was shorter with the Study regimen while mean colonic transit times were similar for both study groups.A CCE bowel preparation regimen using oral sulfate solution and diatrizoate solution as a boost agent is effective, safe, and achieved superior CCE completion.

Project description:BackgroundColonoscopy is the gold standard for lower gastrointestinal diagnostics. The procedure is invasive, and its demand is high, resulting in long waiting times. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) is a procedure that uses a video capsule to investigate the colon, meaning that it can be carried out in a person's own home. This type of "hospital-at-home" service could potentially reduce costs and waiting times, and increase patient satisfaction. Little is currently understood, however, about how CCE is actually experienced and accepted by patients.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to capture and report patient experiences of the CCE technology (the capsule and associated belt and recorder) and of the new clinical pathway for the CCE service being rolled out as part of routine service in Scotland.MethodsThis was a mixed methods service evaluation of patient experiences of a real-world, deployed, managed service for CCE in Scotland. Two hundred and nine patients provided feedback via a survey about their experiences of the CCE service. Eighteen of these patients took part in a further telephone interview to capture more in-depth lived experiences to understand the barriers and opportunities for the further adoption and scaling up of the CCE service in a way that supports the patient experience and journey.ResultsPatients overall perceived the CCE service to be of significant value (eg, mentioning reduced travel times, reduced waiting times, and freedom to complete the procedure at home as perceived benefits). Our findings also highlighted the importance of clear and accessible information (eg, what to expect and how to undertake the bowel preparation) and the need for managing expectations of patients (eg, being clear about when results will be received and what happens if a further colonoscopy is required).ConclusionsThe findings led to recommendations for future implementations of managed CCE services in National Health Service (NHS) Scotland that could also apply more widely (United Kingdom and beyond) and at a greater scale (with more patients in more contexts). These include promoting CCE with, for, and among clinical teams to ensure adoption and success; capturing and understanding reasons why patients do and do not opt for CCE; providing clear information in a variety of appropriate ways to patients (eg, around the importance of bowel preparation instructions); improving the bowel preparation (this is not specific to CCE alone); providing flexible options for issuing and returning the kit (eg, dropping off at a pharmacy); and embedding formative evaluation within the service itself (eg, capturing patient-reported experiences via surveys in the information pack when the equipment is returned).

Project description:BackgroundPatients with Crohn's disease (CD) undergo frequent endoscopic procedures, with visualization of the gastrointestinal mucosa central to treatment decision-making. Subsequently, a noninvasive alternative to optical colonoscopy (OC) would be welcomed. One such technology is capsule endoscopy, including the PillCam COLON 2 (PCC2), though research validating its use in ileocolonic CD is limited. This study aims to compare PCC2 with ileocolonoscopy (OC) in assessing mucosal CD through use of a standardized scoring system.MethodsAt an Australian tertiary hospital, same-day PCC2 and ileocolonoscopy results of 47 CD patients, with known nonstricturing disease, were prospectively collected and analyzed for correlation and agreement. Deidentified recordings were reported by a single expert gastroenterologist. Mucosal disease was quantified using the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease (SES-CD). The SES-CD results of paired endoscopic modalities were compared in total per bowel segment and per SES-CD variable.ResultsOf 47 PCC2 recordings, 68% were complete, fully assessing terminal ileum to rectum, and OC was complete in 89%. Correlation (r) between total SES-CD scores was strongest in the terminal ileum (r = 0.77, P < .001), with the SES-CD variable of "ulcer detection" showing the strongest agreement. The PCC2 (vs OC) identified additional ulcers in the terminal ileum; ascending, transverse, and descending colon; and rectum; scores were 5 (1), 5 (3), 1 (1), 2 (1), and 2 (2), respectively.ConclusionsThe PCC2 shows promise in assessing ileocolonic mucosa, especially in proximal bowel segments, with greater reach of visualization in the small bowel. Given the resource and safety considerations raised by the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, capsule endoscopy has particular significance.This article aims to contribute to the limited body of research surrounding the validity of capsule endoscopy technology in assessing ileocolonic mucosa in Crohn's Disease patients. In doing so, an alternative option for patients enduring frequent endoscopies is given potential.