Literature DB >> 24711767

Quality metrics in endoscopy.

Suryakanth R Gurudu1, Francisco C Ramirez1.   

Abstract

Endoscopy has evolved in the past 4 decades to become an important tool in the diagnosis and management of many digestive diseases. Greater focus on endoscopic quality has highlighted the need to ensure competency among endoscopists. A joint task force of the American College of Gastroenterology and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has proposed several quality metrics to establish competence and help define areas of continuous quality improvement. These metrics represent quality in endoscopy pertinent to pre-, intra-, and postprocedural periods. Quality in endoscopy is a dynamic and multidimensional process that requires continuous monitoring of several indicators and benchmarking with local and national standards. Institutions and practices should have a process in place for credentialing endoscopists and for the assessment of competence regarding individual endoscopic procedures.

Keywords:  Competence; endoscopy; quality improvement; quality metrics

Year:  2013        PMID: 24711767      PMCID: PMC3977641     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)        ISSN: 1554-7914


  46 in total

1.  The role of endoscopic therapy in the management of variceal hemorrhage.

Authors:  Glenn M Eisen; Todd H Baron; Jason A Dominitz; Douglas O Faigel; Jay L Goldstein; John F Johanson; J Shawn Mallery; Hareth M Raddawi; John J Vargo; J Patrick Waring; Robert D Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbaugh
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Appropriate use of GI endoscopy.

Authors:  Dayna S Early; Tamir Ben-Menachem; G Anton Decker; John A Evans; Robert D Fanelli; Deborah A Fisher; Norio Fukami; Joo Ha Hwang; Rajeev Jain; Terry L Jue; Khalid M Khan; Phyllis M Malpas; John T Maple; Ravi S Sharaf; Jason A Dominitz; Brooks D Cash
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 3.  Colonoscopy training--new approaches, old problems.

Authors:  Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Christopher B Williams
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2005-10

4.  Training to competency in colonoscopy: assessing and defining competency standards.

Authors:  Robert E Sedlack
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2011-04-23       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Assessment of technical competence during ERCP training.

Authors:  J L Watkins; K P Etzkorn; T E Wiley; L DeGuzman; J M Harig
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Prevalence and predictors of interval colorectal cancers in medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Gregory S Cooper; Fang Xu; Jill S Barnholtz Sloan; Mark D Schluchter; Siran M Koroukian
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates.

Authors:  D K Rex
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Nancy N Baxter; Rinku Sutradhar; Shawn S Forbes; Lawrence F Paszat; Refik Saskin; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-09-18       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  International consensus recommendations on the management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Alan N Barkun; Marc Bardou; Ernst J Kuipers; Joseph Sung; Richard H Hunt; Myriam Martel; Paul Sinclair
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Impact of bowel preparation on efficiency and cost of colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Thomas F Imperiale; Danielle R Latinovich; L Lisa Bratcher
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 10.864

View more
  7 in total

1.  Risk of colon perforation during colonoscopy at Baylor University Medical Center.

Authors:  Daniel E Polter
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2015-01

2.  The use of high definition colonoscopy versus standard definition: does it affect polyp detection rate?

Authors:  John Richardson; Anthony Thaventhiran; Hugh Mackenzie; Benjamin Stubbs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Quality measures in endoscopy: A systematic analysis of the overall scientific level of evidence and conflicts of interest.

Authors:  Simcha Weissman; Muhammad Aziz; Matthew R Baniqued; Vikas Taneja; Mohammed El-Dallal; Wade Lee-Smith; Sameh Elias; Joseph D Feuerstein
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2022-06-10

Review 4.  Defining medical simulators for simulation-based education in EUS: Theoretical approach and a narrative review.

Authors:  Morten Bo Søndergaard Svendsen; Michael Patrick Achiam
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.275

5.  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

6.  Role of Bowel Preparation in Adenoma Detection Rate and Follow-up Recommendations in African American Dominant Patient Population.

Authors:  Hamid-Reza Moein; Eskara Pervez; Salina Faidhalla; Heba Habbal; Hajra Khan; Anshu Wadehra; Mahvish Khalid; Diana Kakos; Paul Naylor; Bashar Mohamad
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-06-30

7.  Adenoma and Polyp Detection Rates in Colonoscopy according to Indication.

Authors:  Erika S Boroff; Molly Disbrow; Michael D Crowell; Francisco C Ramirez
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 2.260

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.