Literature DB >> 17678600

[Guidelines for the rational use of endoscopy to improve the detection of relevant lesions in an open-access endoscopy unit: a prospective study].

Glòria Fernández-Esparrach1, Antonio Z Gimeno-García, Josep Llach, Maria Pellisé, Angels Ginès, Francesc Balaguer, Alfredo Mata, Antoni Castells, Josep M Bordas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: Almost 50% of gastrointestinal endoscopies performed in our Unit correspond to patients coming from primary care. Since resources are finite, adherence to appropriate indications for these procedures is essential. We prospectively assessed the appropriateness of gastrointestinal endoscopies referred from Primary Care according to the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) criteria. PATIENTS AND
METHOD: From May to June 2005, all consecutive patients referred from Primary care to our unit for open-access endoscopy were included (478 colonoscopies and 264 gastroscopies). Appropriateness of each exploration was established according to the EPAGE criteria. In order to evaluate whether appropriateness of use correlated with the diagnostic yield of endoscopies, relevant endoscopic findings were recorded.
RESULTS: In 146 patients (20%), an endoscopy indication was not listed in the EPAGE guidelines or data were incomplete and they were not evaluated. In the remaining 596 patients, the indication of the procedure was considered appropriate in 401 (67%) patients (253 [69%], colonoscopies and 148 [65%], gastroscopies). The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for appropriate endoscopies (30% vs 7%, p < 0.001). Endoscopies were more appropriate in older patients and in non-foreigners.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic yield of gastrointestinal endoscopies in patients coming from primary Care increases with the appropriateness of indications according to the EPAGE criteria. Since a noteworthy proportion of these patients' endoscopies are considered inappropriate, the implementation of validated guidelines for its appropriate use could improve this situation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17678600     DOI: 10.1157/13107917

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)        ISSN: 0025-7753            Impact factor:   1.725


  6 in total

Review 1.  Colonoscopy appropriateness: Really needed or a waste of time?

Authors:  Antonio Z Gimeno-García; Enrique Quintero
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-02-16

2.  Clinical validation of the European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE) II criteria in an open-access unit: a prospective study.

Authors:  A Z Gimeno García; Y González; E Quintero; D Nicolás-Pérez; Z Adrián; R Romero; O Alarcón Fernández; M Hernández; M Carrillo; V Felipe; J Díaz; L Ramos; M Moreno; A Jiménez-Sosa
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  UEG Week 2020 Poster Presentations.

Authors: 
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.623

4.  "Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross sectional study from Sri Lanka".

Authors:  Yasara Samarakoon; Nalika Gunawardena; Aloka Pathirana; Sumudu Hewage
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  A cross-sectional study of the appropriateness of colonoscopy requests in the Spanish region of Catalonia.

Authors:  Diana Puente; Francesc Xavier Cantero; Maria Llagostera; Pilar Piñeiro; Raquel Nieto; Rosa Saladich; Juanjo Mascort; Mercè Marzo; Jesús Almeda; Manel Segarra
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Appropriateness of colonoscopy requests according to EPAGE-II in the Spanish region of Catalonia.

Authors:  M Marzo-Castillejo; J Almeda; J J Mascort; O Cunillera; R Saladich; R Nieto; P Piñeiro; M Llagostera; Fx Cantero; M Segarra; D Puente
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 2.497

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.