Effect of using personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality indicators of screening colonoscopies

Subin Chirayath; Janak Bahirwani; Parampreet Kaur; Noel Martins; Ronak Modi

doi:10.1101/2021.05.07.21256743

Abstract

Background Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected many facets of the practice of medicine including screening colonoscopies.

Aims Our study looks to observe if there has been an effect on the quality of colonoscopies, as indicated by quality measures such as cecal intubation rate (CIR), cecal intubation time (CIT), scope withdrawal time (SWT) and adenoma detection rate (ADR) with the adoption of standard COVID-19 precautions.

Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review to analyze the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on screening colonoscopies. The study utilized data on CIR, CIT, SWT and ADR from outpatient, non-emergent procedures conducted at 3 endoscopy suites of St Luke’s University Health Network. All inpatient and emergent procedures were excluded.

Results Our study demonstrated that the total number of screening colonoscopies was decreased between 2019 to 2020 (318 in 2019 vs 157 in 2020, p= 0.005). CIT (320±105 seconds in 2019 vs 392±107 seconds in 2020, p=0.001) and SWT (706±232 seconds in 2019 vs 830±241 seconds in 2020, p=0.001) were increased while CIR (98.2% in 2019 vs 96.6% in 2020, p=0.04) was decreased between 2019 and 2020 likely due to PPE introduction. ADR was similar between the two groups (38.23 (12.50-66.66) in 2019 vs 38.18(16.66-66.00) in 2020, p=0.8).

Conclusion Our study showed that quality indices for screening colonoscopies like CIR, CIT, and SWT were negatively impacted during the COVID-19 time period. ADR, however, were similar. Thus, the efficiency of the procedures was affected by the use of PPE but it did not affect the colonoscopy’s clinical benefit.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study was not funded by a grant.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of St. Luke's University Hospital. The following is a statement of their approval: This approval is based on the understanding that you will: - Immediately inform the IRB of all patients serious adverse events and any changes in procedures and project status changes that may occur after this review. - Use only reproductions of the enclosed informed consent form displaying the IRB approval stamp. - Agree to comply with FDA, OPRR, and St Luke's Hospital IRB regulations. - Allow the review of research project records by the IRB as requested. St. Luke's University Health Network has a Federal Wide Assurance [FWA 00003557] from OHRP. The Institutional Review Board is registered with OHRP [IRB 00002757] and is in compliance with 45 CFR 46, 21 CFR 50 and 21 CFR 56. To the extent these Federal regulations are in agreement with the ICH Guidelines, we are also in GCP compliance.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

Subin Chirayath DO: Author, Editor, Data Collection
Janak Bahirwani MD: Author, Editor, Data Collection
Parampreet Kaur MD: Editor, Data Analysis
Noel Martins MD: Editor, Data Collection
Ronak Modi MD: Editor, Principle Investigator
There are no conflicts of interests for all authors listed. Data, analytic methods, and study materials will not be made available to other researchers. This study was not funded by a grant.