The Polyp Manager: a new tool for optimal polyp documentation during colonoscopy. A pilot study.

Background and study aims: Conventional reporting of polyps is often incomplete. We tested the Polyp Manager (PM), a new software application permitting the endoscopist to document polyps in real time during colonoscopy. We studied completeness of polyp descriptions, user-friendliness and the potential time benefit.

Patients and methods: In two Dutch hospitals colonoscopies were performed with PM (as a touchscreen endoscopist-operated device or nurse-operated desktop application). Completeness of polyp descriptions was compared to a historical group with conventional reporting (CR_H). Prospectively, we compared user-friendliness (VAS-scores) and time benefit of the endoscopist-operated PM to conventional reporting (CR) in one hospital. Duration of colonoscopy and time needed to report polyps and provide a pathology request were measured. Provided that using PM does not prolong colonoscopy, the sum of the latter two was considered as a potential time-benefit if the PM were fully integrated into a digital reporting system.

Results: A total of 144 regular colonoscopies were included in the study. Both groups were comparable with regard to patient characteristics, duration of colonoscopy and number of polyps. Using the PM did reduce incomplete documentation of the following items in CR_H-reports: location (96 % vs 82 %, P = 0.01), size (95 % vs 89 %, P = 0.03), aspect (71 % vs 36 %, P < 0.001) and completeness of removal (61 % vs 37 %, P < 0.001). In the prospective study 23 PM-colonoscopies where compared to 28 CR-colonoscopies. VAS-scores were significantly higher in the endoscopist-operated PM group. Time to report was 01:27 ± 01:43 minutes (median + interquartile range) in the entire group (PM as CR), reflecting potential time benefit per colonoscopy.

Conclusions: The PM is a user-friendly tool that seems to improve completeness of polyp reporting. Once integrated with digital reporting systems, it is probably time saving as well.

• References

• 1 Lin OS, Kozarek RA, Cha JM. Impact of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: an evidence-based review of published prospective and retrospective studies. Intest Res 2014; 12: 268-274
• 2 Lieberman D, Nadel M, Smith RA et al. Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 757-766
• 3 RIVM. Technical dataset colonoscopy. Available at Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (Dutch); 2014 http://www.bevolkingsonderzoekdarmkanker.nl/downloads (Accessed June 20, 2015)
• 4 Dekker E, van Leerdam ME, Hazewinkel Y et al. Guideline: Colonoscopy surveillance. Available at Nederlandse Vereniging van Maag-, Darm- en Leverartsen in samenwerking met Nederlandse Vereniging van Pathologie (Dutch); 2013 www.mdl.nl/richtlijnen2 (Accessed June 20, 2015)
• 5 Beaulieu D, Barkun A, Martel M. Quality audit of colonoscopy reports amongst patients screened or surveilled for colorectal neoplasia. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 3551-3557
• 6 Beaulieu D, Martel M, Barkun AN. A prospective intervention study of colonoscopy reporting among patients screened or surveilled for colorectal neoplasia. Can J Gastroenterol 2012; 26: 718-722
• 7 Coe SG, Panjala C, Heckman MG et al. Quality in colonoscopy reporting: an assessment of compliance and performance improvement. Digest Liver Dis 2012; 44: 660-664
• 8 de Jonge V, Sint Nicolaas J, Cahen DL et al. Quality evaluation of colonoscopy reporting and colonoscopy performance in daily clinical practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 98-106
• 9 Li J, Nadel MR, Poppell CF et al. Quality assessment of colonoscopy reporting: results from a statewide cancer screening program. Diagn Ther Endosc 2010;
• 10 Lieberman DA, Faigel DO, Logan JR et al. Assessment of the quality of colonoscopy reports: results from a multicenter consortium. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 645-653
• 11 Palmer LB, Abbott DH, Hamilton N et al. Quality of colonoscopy reporting in community practice. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 321-327, 327 e321
• 12 Robertson DJ, Lawrence LB, Shaheen NJ et al. Quality of colonoscopy reporting: a process of care study. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 2651-2656
• 13 Singh H, Kaita L, Taylor G et al. Practice and documentation of performance of colonoscopy in a central Canadian health region. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 28: 185-190
• 14 Gouveia-Oliveira A, Salgado NC, Azevedo AP et al. A unified approach to the design of clinical reporting systems. Methods Inf Med 1994; 33: 479-487