Literature DB >> 23712304

Endoscopy reporting standards.

Daphnée Beaulieu1, Alan N Barkun, Catherine Dubé, Jill Tinmouth, Pierre Hallé, Myriam Martel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) recently published consensus recommendations for safety and quality indicators in digestive endoscopy. The present article focuses specifically on the identification of key elements that should be found in all electronic endoscopy reports detailing recommendations adopted by the CAG consensus group.
METHODS: A committee of nine individuals steered the CAG Safety and Quality Indicators in Endoscopy Consensus Group, which had a total membership of 35 voting individuals with knowledge on the subject relating to endoscopic services. A comprehensive literature search was performed with regard to the key elements that should be found in an electronic endoscopy report. A task force reviewed all published, full-text, adult and human studies in French or English.
RESULTS: Components to be entered into the standardized report include identification of procedure, timing, procedural personnel, patient demographics and history, indication(s) for procedure, comorbidities, type of bowel preparation, consent for the procedure, pre-endoscopic administration of medications, type and dose of sedation used, extent and completeness of examination, quality of bowel preparation, relevant findings and pertinent negatives, adverse events and resulting interventions, patient comfort, diagnoses, endoscopic interventions performed, details of pathology specimens, details of follow-up arrangements, appended pathology report(s) and, when available, management recommendations. Summary information should be provided to the patient or family.
CONCLUSION: Continuous quality improvement should be the responsibility of every endoscopist and endoscopy facility to ensure improved patient care. Appropriate documentation of endoscopic procedures is a critical component of such activities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23712304      PMCID: PMC3735732          DOI: 10.1155/2013/145894

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0835-7900            Impact factor:   3.522


  57 in total

1.  Still photography versus videotaping for documentation of cecal intubation: a prospective study.

Authors:  D K Rex
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Douglas K Rex; Sidney J Winawer; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Theodore R Levin
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Computerisation of endoscopy reports using standard reports and text blocks.

Authors:  M J M Groenen; E J Kuipers; G P van Berge Henegouwen; P Fockens; R J Th Ouwendijk
Journal:  Neth J Med       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  Quality assurance as an integrated part of the electronic medical record - a prototype applied for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Geir Hoff; Per Marcus Ottestad; Stein Roger Skafløtten; Michael Bretthauer; Volker Moritz
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.423

5.  Antibiotic prophylaxis for GI endoscopy.

Authors:  Subhas Banerjee; Bo Shen; Todd H Baron; Douglas B Nelson; Michelle A Anderson; Brooks D Cash; Jason A Dominitz; S Ian Gan; M Edwyn Harrison; Steven O Ikenberry; Sanjay B Jagannath; David Lichtenstein; Robert D Fanelli; Ken Lee; Trina van Guilder; Leslie E Stewart
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Management of antithrombotic agents for endoscopic procedures.

Authors:  Michelle A Anderson; Tamir Ben-Menachem; S Ian Gan; Vasundhara Appalaneni; Subhas Banerjee; Brooks D Cash; Laurel Fisher; M Edwyn Harrison; Robert D Fanelli; Norio Fukami; Steven O Ikenberry; Rajeev Jain; Khalid Khan; Mary Lee Krinsky; David R Lichtenstein; John T Maple; Bo Shen; Laura Strohmeyer; Todd Baron; Jason A Dominitz
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 7.  Identifying and reporting risk factors for adverse events in endoscopy. Part II: noncardiopulmonary events.

Authors:  Joseph Romagnuolo; Peter B Cotton; Glenn Eisen; John Vargo; Bret T Petersen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Photodocumentation of total colonoscopy: how successful are endoscopists? Do reviewers agree?

Authors:  J B Marshall; D N Brown
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Colonoscopy quality measures: experience from the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

Authors:  Thomas J W Lee; Matthew D Rutter; Roger G Blanks; Sue M Moss; Andrew F Goddard; Andrew Chilton; Claire Nickerson; Richard J Q McNally; Julietta Patnick; Colin J Rees
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Technical performance of colonoscopy: the key role of sedation/analgesia and other quality indicators.

Authors:  Franco Radaelli; Gianmichele Meucci; Giusy Sgroi; Giorgio Minoli
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-04-28       Impact factor: 10.864

View more
  7 in total

1.  Making a quality endoscopy report.

Authors:  Mark R Borgaonkar
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 2.  Defining quality indicators for best-practice management of inflammatory bowel disease in Canada.

Authors:  Geoffrey C Nguyen; Shane M Devlin; Waqqas Afif; Brian Bressler; Steven E Gruchy; Gilaad G Kaplan; Liliana Oliveira; Sophie Plamondon; Cynthia H Seow; Chadwick Williams; Karen Wong; Brian M Yan; Jennifer Jones
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-05

3.  Quality standards in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a position statement of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS).

Authors:  Sabina Beg; Krish Ragunath; Andrew Wyman; Matthew Banks; Nigel Trudgill; D Mark Pritchard; Stuart Riley; John Anderson; Helen Griffiths; Pradeep Bhandari; Phillip Kaye; Andrew Veitch
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  Improvement of Endoscopic Reports with Implementation of a Dictation Template.

Authors:  Natasha Harris; Jennifer Telford; Jordan Yonge; Cherry Galorport; Jack Amar; Brian Bressler; Carl Brown; Eric Lam; Estello Nap-Hill; Terry Phang; Alnoor Ramji; Matthew Suzuki; J Scott Whittaker; Robert Enns
Journal:  J Can Assoc Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-12-19

5.  Standard reporting elements for the performance of EUS: Recommendations from the FOCUS working group.

Authors:  Suqing Li; Marc Monachese; Misbah Salim; Naveen Arya; Anand V Sahai; Nauzer Forbes; Christopher Teshima; Mohammad Yaghoobi; Yen-I Chen; Eric Lam; Paul James
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.628

6.  Quality of Reporting in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Effect of a Simple Audit Intervention.

Authors:  Pedro Lisboa-Gonçalves; Diogo Libânio; Joana Marques-Antunes; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro; Pedro Pimentel-Nunes
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-04-03

7.  Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study).

Authors:  Pietro Fusaroli; Mohamad Eloubeidi; Claudio Calvanese; Christoph Dietrich; Christian Jenssen; Adrian Saftoiu; Claudio De Angelis; Shyam Varadarajulu; Bertrand Napoleon; Andrea Lisotti
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2021-06-21
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.