Background: Gastroenterologists should accurately describe endoscopic findings and integrate them into management plans. We aimed to determine if trainees and staff are describing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) lesions in a similar manner.
Methods: Using 20 ileocolonoscopy images, participants described IBD inflammatory burden based on physician severity rating, and Mayo endoscopic score (MES) (ulcerative colitis [UC]) or simple endoscopic score (SES-CD) (Crohn's disease [CD]). Images were selected based on agreement by three IBD experts. Findings of varying severity were presented; 10 images included a question about management. We examined inter-observer agreement among trainees and staff, compared trainees to staff, and determined accuracy of response comparing both groups to IBD experts.
Results: One hundred and twenty-nine staff and 47 trainees participated from across Canada. There was moderate inter-rater agreement using physician severity rating (κ = 0.53 UC and 0.52 CD for staff, κ = 0.51 UC and 0.43 CD for trainees). There was moderate inter-rater agreement for MES for staff and trainees (κ = 0.49 and 0.48, respectively), but fair agreement for SES-CD (κ = 0.37 and 0.32, respectively). For accuracy of response, the mean score was 68.7% for staff and 63.7% for trainees (P = 0.028). Both groups identified healed bowel or severe disease better than mild/moderate (P < 0.05). There was high accuracy for management, but staff scored higher than trainees for UC (P < 0.01).
Conclusion: Inter-rater agreement on description of IBD lesions was moderate at best. Staff and trainees more accurately describe healed and severe disease, and better describe lesions in UC than CD.
Keywords: Crohn’s disease; Endoscopy; Ulcerative colitis.
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.