AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), which affects around 20% of patients undergoing esophageal tests.
  • Experts evaluated proposed quality statements through a detailed three-round process, ultimately agreeing on two key indicators while showing mixed opinions on several others.
  • The results emphasize the importance of determining the clinical relevance of IEM to patient care and indicate a need for more research into its implications in diagnosis and treatment.

Article Abstract

Goals: Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).

Background: IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging.

Study: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process.

Results: All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning.

Conclusion: Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534068PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000001963DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

quality indicators
24
quality indicator
12
quality
10
ineffective esophageal
8
esophageal motility
8
proposed quality
8
mixed agreement
8
identified quality
8
manometric pattern
8
iem
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!