Research Article Assessment of a Colonoscopy Triage Sheet for Use in a Province-Wide Population-Based Colorectal Screening Program Nour Sharara, 1 Sabrina Nolan, 1 Maida Sewitch, 1,2 Myriam Martel, 1 Maria Dias, 3 and Alan N. Barkun 1 1 Division of Gastroenterology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Room D7-346, Montreal, QC, Canada H3G 1A4 2 Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Room D7-346, Montreal, QC, Canada H3G 1A4 3 Department of Nursing, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Room D7-346, Montreal, QC, Canada H3G 1A4 Correspondence should be addressed to Alan N. Barkun; alan.barkun@muhc.mcgill.ca Received 9 February 2016; Accepted 31 May 2016 Academic Editor: Mark Borgaonkar Copyright © 2016 Nour Sharara et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background and Aims. A colonoscopy triage sheet (CTS) integrating 6 hierarchical scheduling priorities based on indications for screening, surveillance, or symptoms was designed for colonoscopy referral. We compared CTS priority ratings by referring physicians and endoscopists, assessing yields. Methods. Retrospective study of consecutive patients. Data were collected on demographics, CTS and endoscopist priority ratings, and endoscopic fndings. Weighted kappa values measured interrater agreement on priority assignment. Predictors of agreement and lesions were identifed using multivariable analysis. Results. Among 1230 patients (60.3 years, 52.5% female), clinically signifcant lesions included tumors (1.1%), polyps per patient ≥ 10mm (7.6%), and ileocolitis (4.6%). Moderate agreement was found between referring physician and endoscopist on all 6 priorities (weighted kappa 0.55 (0.51; 0.59)). P4 and P5 ratings predicted increased agreement (range of OR for P4: 2.47–4.57; P5: 1.58–2.93). Predictors of clinically signifcant fndings were male gender (OR 1.44, 1.03–2.03) and P1/P2 priorities that were signifcantly superior to P3 (OR = 2.14; 1.04–4.43), P4 (OR = 2.90; 1.35–6.23), and P5 (OR = 4.30; 2.08–8.88). Conclusion. Priority-assignment agreement is moderate and highest for less urgent ratings. Predictors of clinically signifcant fndings validate the hierarchal priority scheme. Broader validation and physician education are needed. 1. Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of death worldwide. Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) and it is the second leading cause of death from cancer in men and the third leading cause of death from cancer in women in Canada [1]. Endoscopic resources are, however, in most regions of Canada limited with both selected screening (pos- itive FOBT or imaging) and symptomatic patients requiring a timely colonoscopy. Amidst long delays in access to health care services in Canada, the Canadian Association of Gastroenterol- ogy (CAG) developed evidence-based recommendations for appropriate maximal wait times for colonoscopies in order to promote the efcient and equitable use of endoscopic resources [2]. Based on the CAG guidelines and in the context of an Open-Access Endoscopy system (without a prior clinic consultation with the endoscopist), a 1-page colonoscopy triage sheet (CTS) was developed for the entire province to improve the quality, efciency, and equitable delivery of Hindawi Publishing Corporation Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Volume 2016, Article ID 4712192, 8 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4712192