Skip to main content

Table 2 Endoscopy report data compared to recommended practicesa

From: Optimal endoscopic localization of colorectal neoplasms: a comparison of rural versus urban documentation practices

 

Urban setting

Rural setting

Overall

p*

Compliance with tattoo placement indications

70 (72%)

61 (63%)

131 (68%)

0.16

Tattoo information documented (0–100)

30 ± 12

28 ± 11

29 ± 12

0.25

Tattoo technique (0–100)

70 ± 36

81 ± 32

74 ± 34

0.10

Pre-existing tattoo information included (0–100)

40 ± 0

N/A

40 ± 0

N/A

Photography including all elements of recommendations

27 (28%)

13 (13%)

41 (21%)

0.01

Lesion characteristics (0–100)

 All colorectal lesions

30 ± 9

30 ± 8

30 ± 8

1.00

 Colon lesions

55 ± 22

57 ± 26

56 ± 24

0.56

 Rectum and rectosigmoid lesions

24 ± 16

28 ± 14

26 ± 15

0.07

Total score (0–100)

50 ± 4.3

48 ± 4.6

49 ± 4.4

0.04

  1. Data are expressed as n (%) or mean ± standard deviation (SD)
  2. aJohnson GGRJ, Vergis A, Singh H, Park J, Warriach A, Helewa R [12] Recommendations for optimal endoscopic colorectal lesion localization: A Delphi consensus of national experts. Dis Colon Rectum. In press
  3. *p-value is for pairwise comparison between urban and rural settings. Bold indicates statistically significant, p < 0.05