Background: To improve colonoscopy quality, reports must include key quality indicators that can be monitored.
Objective: To determine the quality of colonoscopy reports in diverse practice settings.
Setting: The consortium of the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative, which includes 73 U.S. gastroenterology practice sites that use a structured computerized endoscopy report generator, which includes fields for specific quality indicators.
Design: Prospective data collection from 2004 to 2006.
Main Outcomes Measurements: Reports were queried to determine if specific quality indicators were recorded. Specific end points, including quality of bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, and detection of polyp(s) >9 mm in screening examinations were compared for 53 practices with more than 100 colonoscopy procedures per year.
Results: Of the 438,521 reports received during the study period, 13.9% did not include bowel-preparation quality and 10.1% did not include comorbidity classification. The overall cecal intubation rate was 96.3%, but cecal landmarks were not recorded in 14% of the reports. Missing polyp descriptors included polyp size (4.9%) and morphology (14.7%). Reporting interventions for adverse events during the procedure varied from 0% to 6.5%. Among average-risk patients who received screening examinations, the detection rate of polyps >9 mm, adjusted for age, sex, and race, was between 4% and 10% in 81% of practices.
Limitation: Bias toward high rates of reporting because of the standard use of a computerized report generator.
Conclusions: There is significant variation in the quality of colonoscopy reports across diverse practices, despite the use of a computerized report generator. Measurement of quality indicators in clinical practice can identify areas for quality improvement.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2749320 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.08.034 | DOI Listing |
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
January 2025
Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville FL. Electronic address:
Description: The aim of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to provide best practice advice (BPA) statements for gastroenterologists and other health care providers who provide care to patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The focus is on IBD-specific screenings (excluding colorectal cancer screening, which is discussed separately) and vaccinations. We provide guidance to ensure that patients are up to date with the disease-specific cancer screenings, vaccinations, as well as advice for mental health and general wellbeing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJMIR Hum Factors
January 2025
School of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, Room B631, No. 365, Ming-te Road, Peitou District, Taipei City, 11219, Taiwan, 886 2 28227101 ext 3186.
Background: Colonoscopy is the standard diagnostic method for colorectal cancer. Patients usually receive written and verbal instructions for bowel preparation (BP) before the procedure. Failure to understand the importance of BP can lead to inadequate BP in 25%-30% of patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMC Gastroenterol
January 2025
Department of Gastroenterology, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Unii Lubelskiej 1, Szczecin, 71-254, Poland.
Background: Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), now known as disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBIs), such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and Functional Dyspepsia (FD), significantly impact global health, reducing quality of life and burdening healthcare systems. This study addresses the epidemiological gap in Poland, focusing on the West Pomeranian Voivodeship.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 2070 Caucasian patients (58.
Sci Rep
January 2025
Nursing Department, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Building 17, 3rd Floor 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
The quality of bowel preparation is an important factor in the success of colonoscopy. However, multiple influencing factors that function together can lead to inadequate bowel preparation. The main objective of this study was to explore the specific factors that affect the quality of bowel preparation, with the goal of deriving and validating a predictive model for inadequate bowel preparation in Chinese outpatients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFGastrointest Endosc
January 2025
Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University Centre for Cancer, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK, NE2 4AX; North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, TS19 8PE.
Background And Aims: Analysis of national colonoscopy quality using automatically uploaded data from a national database, including exploring performance variation.
Methods: Data on all colonoscopies performed in the UK 01/03/2019-29/02/2020 and recorded in the National Endoscopy Database were analysed. Unadjusted key performance indicators were calculated and proportions of endoscopists achieving national standards were determined.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!