No abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS Narrow-band imaging (NBI) allows real-time histologic classification of colorectal polyps. We investigated whether endoscopists without prior training in NBI can achieve the following thresholds recommended by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: for diminutive colorectal polyps characterized with high confidence, a ≥90% negative predictive value for adenomas in the rectosigmoid and a ≥90% agreement in surveillance intervals. METHODS Twenty-six endoscopists from 2 tertiary care centers underwent standardized training in NBI interpretation. Endoscopists made real-time predictions of diminutive colorectal polyp histology and surveillance interval predictions based on NBI. Their performance was evaluated by comparing predicted with actual findings from histologic analysis. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess predictors of performance. Cumulative summation analysis was used to characterize learning curves. RESULTS The endoscopists performed 1451 colonoscopies and made 3012 diminutive polyp predictions (74.3% high confidence) using NBI. They made 898 immediate post-procedure surveillance interval predictions. An additional 505 surveillance intervals were determined with histology input. The overall negative predictive value for high-confidence characterizations in the rectosigmoid was 94.7% (95% confidence interval: 92.6%–96.8%) and the surveillance interval agreement was 91.2% (95% confidence interval: 89.7%–92.7%). Overall, 97.0% of surveillance interval predictions would have brought patients back on time or early. High-confidence characterization was the strongest predictor of accuracy (odds ratio = 3.42; 95% confidence interval: 2.72–4.29; P < .001). Performance improved over time, however, according to cumulative summation analysis, only 7 participants (26.9%) identified adenomas with sufficient sensitivity such that further auditing is not required. CONCLUSIONS With standardized training, gastroenterologists without prior expertise in NBI were able to meet the negative predictive value and surveillance interval thresholds set forth by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. The majority of disagreement in surveillance interval brought patients back early. Performance improves with time, but most endoscopists will require ongoing auditing of performance.

To a great extent, research on geographic accessibility to mammography facilities has focused on urban-rural differences. Spatial accessibility within urban areas can nonetheless pose a challenge, especially for minorities and low-income urban residents who are more likely to depend on public transportation. To examine spatial and temporal accessibility to mammography facilities in the Atlanta metropolitan area by public and private transportation, we built a multimodal transportation network model including bus and rail routes, bus and rail stops, transfers, walk times, and wait times. Our analysis of travel times from the population-weighted centroids of the 282 census tracts in the 2-county area to the nearest facility found that the median public transportation time was almost 51 minutes. We further examined public transportation travel times by levels of household access to a private vehicle. Residents in tracts with the lowest household access to a private vehicle had the shortest travel times, suggesting that facilities were favorably located for women who have to use public transportation. However, census tracts with majority non-Hispanic black populations had the longest travel times for all levels of vehicle availability. Time to the nearest mammography facility would not pose a barrier to women who had access to a private vehicle. This study adds to the literature demonstrating differences in spatial accessibility to health services by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic characteristics. Ameliorating spatial inaccessibility represents an opportunity for intervention that operates at the population level.

Background Although split-dose bowel regimen is recommended in colon cancer screening and surveillance guidelines, implementation in clinical practice has seemingly lagged because of concerns of patient compliance. Objectives To assess patient compliance with the split-dose bowel regimen and assess patient- and preparation process–related factors associated with compliance and bowel preparation adequacy. Design Prospective survey cohort. Setting Tertiary care setting. Patients Average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening between August 2011 and January 2013. Main Outcome Measurements Split-dose bowel regimen patient-reported compliance and bowel preparation adequacy with the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score. Results Surveys and Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score data were completed in 462 participants; 15.4% were noncompliant with the split-dose bowel regimen, and suboptimal bowel preparation (score < 5) was reported in 16% of all procedures. White (P = .009) and married (P = .01) subjects were least likely to be noncompliant, whereas Hispanic subjects and those who reported incomes of US$75,000 or less were most likely to be noncompliant (P = .004). Participants who were noncompliant with split-dosing were less likely to follow the other laxative instructions and more likely to have their colonoscopy appointment before 10:30 am. Compliance differed by bowel preparation type (P = .003, χ2 test), with those who used MiraLAX showing the highest compliance, followed by polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution and other bowel preparations. Noncompliance with split-dose bowel preparation (odds ratio 6.7; 95% confidence interval, 3.2–14.2) was the strongest predictor of suboptimal bowel preparation. Limitations Patient self-report, performed at tertiary care center. Conclusions Overall, 1 in 7 patients do not comply with a split-dose bowel regimen. Ensuring compliance with the split-dose bowel regimen will reduce the risk of a suboptimal bowel preparation. (Gastrointest Endosc 2014;79:811-20.)