Dataset Information

Colonoscopy overuse in colorectal cancer screening and associated factors in Argentina: a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT: In recent years, there has been growing concern about the overuse of colonoscopy (CC). Our objective was to evaluate the incidence rate and cumulative probability of having a potentially inadequate CC (PI-CC, e.g. a CC that was performed earlier that recommended) and the association between the report of a hyperplastic polyp in the baseline CC report and the probability of having a PI-CC.A retrospective cohort of adults 50y/o or older with a complete baseline CC between January 1st and December 31st 2005, without reported lesions or with hyperplastic polyps, based on secondary data extracted from the electronic medical record of the Hospital Italiano of Buenos Aires. The outcome consisted of time until a PI-CC, defined as the time measured between basal colonoscopy and a colonoscopy performed earlier than the inter-screening interval recommended by the USPSTF and the USMSTF.389 patients were included. The cumulative probability of receiving a PI-CC over 10 years was 0.29 (95% CI 0.241, 0.342). The incidence rate resulted in 30.91 PI-CC per 1000 person-years (95% CI 25.14, 38). The crude analysis of the association between the outcome and the presence of hyperplastic polyps in the baseline CC, showed a statistically significant difference between both groups (log rank, p 0.036). The multivariate analysis yielded a hazard ratio of 1.67 (95% CI 1.02-2.73).We observed that 3 in every 10 patients treated in our health system received a PI-CC during the first ten consecutive years after a normal complete CC. Furthermore, this could be in part attributed to the presence of a hyperplastic polyp in the baseline CC.

SUBMITTER: Esteban S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5732490 | biostudies-other | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Colonoscopy overuse in colorectal cancer screening and associated factors in Argentina: a retrospective cohort study.

Esteban Santiago S Ricci Ricardo R Terrasa Sergio S Kopitowski Karin K

BMC gastroenterology 20171215 1

<h4>Background</h4>In recent years, there has been growing concern about the overuse of colonoscopy (CC). Our objective was to evaluate the incidence rate and cumulative probability of having a potentially inadequate CC (PI-CC, e.g. a CC that was performed earlier that recommended) and the association between the report of a hyperplastic polyp in the baseline CC report and the probability of having a PI-CC.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective cohort of adults 50y/o or older with a complete baseline C ...[more]

PMID: 29246189

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study aimed to investigate the potential factors associated with adherence to colonoscopy among participants who were preliminarily screened positive in a community-based colorectal cancer screening program in China. This study analyzed data from 1219 out of 6971 community residents who were identified as positive cases by the well-validated high-risk factor questionnaire (HRFQ) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in the preliminary screening stage for colorectal neoplasms. Patients showing adherence to colonoscopy were defined as those who received positive results in a preliminary screening for colorectal neoplasms and later received a colonoscopy examination as required. The associations of social-demographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, history of diabetes, body mass index (BMI), and risk factors in the HRFQ with adherence to colonoscopy were evaluated using logistic regression models. Among 1219 participants who preliminarily screened positive, the top five risk factors reported by the participants were chronic constipation (25.9%), hematochezia (23.5%), family history of CRC in first-degree relatives (22.1%), chronic diarrhea (21.8%), and history of polyps (16.6%). Around 14.2% of participants who preliminarily screened positive reported three or more risk factors, and the proportion was 26.2% among participants who were positive according to both HRFQ and FIT. Among all participants who were preliminarily screened positive, the multivariable results showed that those who were married (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.12, 2.25, p = 0.01), had chronic diarrhea (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.78, p = 0.047), and had a positive FIT (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.10, p < 0.001 for patients who were negative according to HRFQ but positive according to FIT; OR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.33, 2.78, p = 0.002 for patients who were positive for both HRFQ and FIT) were more likely to adhere to colonoscopy, while participants with a history of cancer (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.79, p = 0.003) were less likely to adhere to colonoscopy. The results among participants who were tested positive according to only HRFQ were similar to those among all participants who were tested positive according to HRFQ or FIT. However, among participants who were tested positive according to only FIT, we only found that those who were married (OR = 2.52, 95% CI: 1.08, 5.90, p = 0.033) had a higher odds of adhering to colonoscopy, while those with a history of diabetes (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.96, p = 0.042) were less likely to adhere to colonoscopy. Our findings provide evidence supporting the development of tailored interventional strategies that aim to improve adherence to colonoscopy for individuals with a high risk of colorectal neoplasms. Both barriers and facilitators associated with adherence to colonoscopy should be considered in supportive systems and health policies. However, further well-designed prospective studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical screening trials have shown that sigmoidoscopy screening reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy has largely replaced sigmoidoscopy for CRC screening, but long-term results from randomized trials on colonoscopy screening are still lacking.ObjectiveTo estimate the additional screening benefit of colonoscopy compared with sigmoidoscopy.Design, setting, and participantsThis comparative effectiveness simulation study pooled data on 358 204 men and women randomly assigned to sigmoidoscopy screening or usual care in 4 randomized sigmoidoscopy screening trials conducted in Norway, Italy, the US, and UK with inclusion periods in the years 1993 to 2001. The primary analysis of the study was conducted from January 19 to December 30, 2021.InterventionInvitation to endoscopic screening.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were CRC incidence and mortality. Using pooled 15-year follow-up data, colonoscopy screening effectiveness was estimated assuming that the efficacy of colonoscopy in the proximal colon was similar to that observed in the distal colon in the sigmoidoscopy screening trials. The simulation model was validated using data from Norwegian participants in a colonoscopy screening trial.ResultsThis analysis included 358 204 individuals (181 971 women [51%]) aged 55 to 64 years at inclusion with a median follow-up time ranging from 15 to 17 years. Compared with usual care, colonoscopy prevented an estimated 50 (95% CI, 42-58) CRC cases per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 30% incidence reduction (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.66-0.75]), and prevented an estimated 15 (95% CI, 11-19) CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to 32% mortality reduction (rate ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.61-0.76]). The additional benefit of colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy was 12 (95% CI, 10-14) fewer CRC cases and 4 (95% CI, 3-5) fewer CRC deaths per 100 000 person-years, corresponding to percentage point reductions of 6.9 (95% CI, 6.0-7.9) for CRC incidence and 7.6 (95% CI, 5.7-9.6) for CRC mortality. The number needed to switch from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy screening was 560 (95% CI, 486-661) to prevent 1 CRC case and 1611 (95% CI, 1275-2188) to prevent 1 CRC death.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this comparative effectiveness study assessing long-term follow-up after CRC screening suggest that there was an additional preventive effect on CRC incidence and mortality associated with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening, but the additional preventive effect was less than what was achieved by introducing sigmoidoscopy screening where no screening existed. The results probably represent the upper limit of what may be achieved with colonoscopy screening compared with sigmoidoscopy screening.

Project description:Regular screening with colonoscopy lowers colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. We aimed to determine patterns of repeat and surveillance colonoscopy and identify factors associated with overuse and underuse of colonoscopy.We analyzed data from participants in a previous Veterans Health Administration (VHA) study who underwent outpatient colonoscopy at 25 VHA facilities between October 2007 and September 2008 (n = 1455). The proportion of patients who received a follow-up colonoscopy was calculated for 3 risk groups, which were defined on the basis of the index colonoscopy: no adenoma, low-risk adenoma, or high-risk adenoma.Colonoscopy was overused (used more frequently than intervals recommended by guidelines) by 16% of patients with no adenomas, 26% with low-risk adenomas, and 29% with high-risk adenomas. Most patients with high-risk adenomas (54%) underwent colonoscopy after the recommended interval or did not undergo colonoscopy. Patients who received a follow-up recommendation that was discordant with guidelines were more likely to undergo colonoscopy too early (no adenoma odds ratio [OR], 3.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.31-6.25 and low-risk adenoma OR, 5.28; 95% CI, 1.88-14.83). Receipt of colonoscopy at nonacademic facilities was associated with overuse among patients without adenomas (OR, 5.26; 95% CI, 1.96-14.29) or with low-risk adenomas (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.52-7.69). Performance of colonoscopies by general surgeons vs gastroenterologists (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.02-4.23) and female sex of the patient (OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.06-10.16) were associated with overuse of colonoscopy for patients with low-risk adenomas. No factors examined were associated with underuse of colonoscopy among patients with high-risk adenomas.In an analysis of patients in the VHA system, more than one fourth of patients with low-risk adenomas received follow-up colonoscopies too early, whereas more than one half of those with high-risk adenomas did not undergo surveillance colonoscopy as recommended. Our findings highlight the need for system-level improvements to facilitate the appropriate delivery of colonoscopy that is based on individual risk.

Dataset Information

Colonoscopy overuse in colorectal cancer screening and associated factors in Argentina: a retrospective cohort study.

Publications

Colonoscopy overuse in colorectal cancer screening and associated factors in Argentina: a retrospective cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets