29 research outputs found

    Shortened surveillance intervals following suboptimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy: Results of a national survey

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Suboptimal bowel preparation can result in decreased neoplasia detection, shortened surveillance intervals, and increased costs. We assessed bowel preparation recommendations and the relationship to self-reported proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations in practice; and evaluated the impact of suboptimal bowel preparation on colonoscopy surveillance practices. A random sample of a national organization of gastroenterologists in the U.S. was surveyed. Methods: Demographic and practice characteristics, bowel preparation regimens, and proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations in practice were ascertained. Recommended follow-up colonoscopy intervals were evaluated for optimal and suboptimal bowel preparation and select clinical scenarios. Results: We identified 6,777 physicians, of which 1,354 were randomly selected; 999 were eligible, and 288 completed the survey. Higher proportion of suboptimal bowel preparations/week (≥10 %) was associated with hospital/university practice, teaching hospital affiliation, greater than 25 % Medicaid insured patients, recommendation of PEG alone and sulfate-free. Those reporting greater than 25 % Medicare and privately insured patients, split dose recommendation, and use of MoviPrep® were associated with a less than 10 % suboptimal bowel preparations/week. Shorter surveillance intervals for three clinical scenarios were reported for suboptimal preparations and were shortest among participants in the Northeast who more often recommended early follow-up for normal findings and small adenomas. Those who recommended 4-l PEG alone more often advised less than 1 year surveillance interval for a large adenoma. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates significantly shortened surveillance interval recommendations for suboptimal bowel preparation and that these interval recommendations vary regionally in the United States. Findings suggest an interrelationship between dietary restriction, purgative type, and practice and patient characteristics that warrant additional research

    Gastroenterologists' Perceived Barriers to Optimal Pre-Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation: Results of a National Survey

    Get PDF
    Poor quality bowel preparation has been reported in almost one third of all colonoscopies. To better understand factors associated with poor bowel preparation, we explored perceived patient barriers to optimal pre-colonoscopy bowel preparation from the perspective of the gastroenterologist. A random sample of physician members of the American College of Gastroenterology was surveyed via the internet and postal mailing. Demographic and practice characteristics and practice-related and perceived patient barriers to optimal bowel preparation were assessed among 288 respondents. Lack of time, no patient education reimbursement, and volume of information were not associated with physician level of suboptimal bowel preparation. Those reporting greater than or equal to 10 % suboptimal bowel preparations were more likely to believe patients lack understanding of the importance of following instructions, have problems with diet, and experience trouble tolerating the purgative. Bowel preparation instruction communication and unmet patient educational needs contribute to suboptimal bowel preparation. Educational interventions should address both practice and patient-related factors

    Split dose and MiraLAX-based purgatives to enhance bowel preparation quality becoming common recommendations in the US

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Rates of suboptimal bowel preparation up to 30% have been reported. Liberalized precolonoscopy diet, split dose purgative, and the use of MiraLAX-based bowel preparation (MBBP) prior to colonoscopy are recently developed measures to improve bowel preparation quality but little is known about the utilization prevalence of these measures. We examined the patterns of utilization of these newer approaches to improve precolonoscopy bowel preparation quality among American gastroenterologists. Methods: Surveys were distributed to a random sample of members of the American College of Gastroenterologists. Participants were queried regarding demographics, practice characteristics, and bowel preparation recommendations including recommendations for liberal dietary restrictions, split dose purgative, and the use of MBBP. Approaches were evaluated individually and in combination. Results: Of the 999 eligible participants, 288 responded; 15.2% recommended a liberal diet, 60.0% split dose purgative, and 37.4% MBBP. Diet recommendations varied geographically with gastroenterologists in the West more likely to recommend a restrictive diet (odds ratio [OR] 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–7.67) and physicians in the Northeast more likely to recommend a liberal diet more likely. Older physicians more often recommended split dosing (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.04–2.97). Use of MBBP was more common in suburban settings (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.23–3.73). Evidence suggests that physicians in private practice were more likely to prescribe split dosing (p = 0.03) and less often recommended MBBP (p = 0.02). Likelihood of prescribing MBBP increased as weekly volume of colonoscopy increased (p = 0.03). Conclusions: To enhance bowel preparation quality American gastroenterologists commonly use purgative split dosing. The use of MBBP is becoming more prevalent while a liberalized diet is infrequently recommended. Utilization of these newer approaches to improve bowel preparation quality varies by physician and practice characteristics. Further evaluation of the patterns of usage of these measures is indicated

    Use of a Urine Anastrozole Assay to Determine Treatment Discontinuation Among Women With Hormone-Sensitive Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Multiple studies have shown that adherence to adjuvant hormonal therapy in women with breast cancer is suboptimal. Measurements of compliance with self-report, pill counts, and/or pharmacy records are susceptible to bias. We assessed the feasibility of using a urine anastrozole assay as an objective biomarker of nonadherence to anastrozole treatment. Patients and Methods: We recruited consecutive postmenopausal women, age ≥ 18 years, with hormone-sensitive nonmetastatic breast cancer who were prescribed anastrozole at least 3 months before enrollment. Each completed a short survey to gather information on demographics, anastrozole compliance history, and self-reported medication history, tumor characteristics, and treatment received. A single, random 15-mL urine sample was collected and tested for the presence of anastrozole using a previously validated assay. Patients were told they were part of a study to determine if anastrozole could be detected in the urine. Results: Among 96 participants, mean age was 63.7 years (range, 51 to 70 years). The population was diverse, with 56.5% white, 57.6% US born, 59.8% unemployed, and 56.6% college educated. Prior treatment included chemotherapy (50%) and/or radiotherapy (58.7%). Mean duration of anastrozole treatment was 2.2 years (standard deviation, 1.6). Four participants reported nonadherence and declined to submit urine samples, and two had no detectable level of anastrozole (six of 96; 6.3%). Detectable levels among adherent women ranged from 49.3 to 632.8 ng/mL. Conclusion: We demonstrated that collection of urine to measure anastrozole levels is feasible and reliable. Identifying biomarkers to measure adherence is critical for studies investigating interventions to improve hormonal therapy compliance

    A survey of breast cancer physicians regarding patient involvement in breast cancer treatment decisions

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Shared breast cancer treatment decision-making between patients and physicians increases patient treatment satisfaction and compliance and is influenced by physician-related factors. Attitudes and behaviors about patient involvement in breast cancer treatment decisions and treatment-related communication were assessed by specialty among breast cancer physicians of women enrolled in the Breast Cancer Quality of Care Study (BQUAL). Results: Of 275 BQUAL physicians identified, 50.0% responded to the survey. Most physicians spend 46-60 min with the patient during the initial consult visit and 51.5% report that the treatment decision is made in one visit. Oncologists spend more time with new breast cancer patients during the initial consult (p = 0.021), and find it more difficult to handle their own feelings than breast surgeons (p = less than 0.001). Conclusion: Breast surgeons and oncologists share similar attitudes and behaviors related to patient involvement in treatment decision-making, yet oncologists report more difficulty managing their own feelings during the decision-making process

    Assessing bowel preparation quality using the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The quality of the bowel preparation directly influences colonoscopy effectiveness. Quality indicators are widely employed to monitor operator performance and to gauge colonoscopy effectiveness. Some have suggested that the enumeration of the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (MNA) may be a more useful measure of bowel preparation quality, but evidence of the utility of this metric is limited. The relationship between bowel preparation quality and MNA was assessed. Methods: Records of adult patients, aged 50–74 years, who had undergone a screening colonoscopy in a 6 month period at a hospital-based endoscopy suite in New York City were examined. Excluded were those who were symptomatic or having a colonoscopy for surveillance. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical findings were abstracted from the endoscopy database. Bowel preparation quality was recorded as excellent, good, fair and poor. Histology and size of polyps removed were gathered from pathology reports. MNA was calculated and incident rate ratios assessing the relationship between bowel preparation quality, MNA, and covariates was calculated using Poisson regression. Results: A total of 2422 colonoscopies were identified; 815 (33.6%) were screening colonoscopies among average risk individuals, 50–74 years; 203 (24.9%) had ≥1 adenomas; and 666 (81.7%) had excellent/good preparation quality. Overall MNA was 0.34 [standard deviation (SD) 0.68] and MNA was greater among those >60 years [incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48–2.42), males (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.26–2.04) and those with good bowel preparation (IRR 2.54, 95%CI 1.04–6.16). Among those with ≥1 adenomas, MNA was 1.48 (SD 1.05) for excellent and 1.00 (SD 0.00) for poor quality preparation (p = 0.55). Conclusions: We found that MNA is sensitive to changes in bowel preparation with higher MNA among those with good bowel preparation compared with those with poor preparation. Our evidence suggests MNA was particularly sensitive when restricted to only those in whom adenomas were seen
    corecore