Literature DB >> 28445903

Patient-reported adverse events after colonoscopy in Norway.

Geir Hoff1,2,3, Thomas de Lange2,4, Michael Bretthauer3,5,6, Magne Buset7, Stein Dahler8, Fred-Arne Halvorsen9, Jörg Michael Halwe10, Mathis Heibert11, Ole Høie12, Øystein Kjellevold13, Volker Moritz1, Per Sandvei14, Birgitte Seip15, Lars Aabakken16,17, Øyvind Holme3,5.   

Abstract

Background and aims Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly important in healthcare. European guidelines have recommended inclusion of patient feedback to capture adverse events due to colonoscopy, but this is rarely implemented. Methods The Norwegian Quality Assurance network for endoscopy (Gastronet) collects patient-reported outcome for colonoscopies. Free-text comments on patient reports from January to December 2015 were characterized as positive or negative. All negative free-text comments were scrutinized for information that might suggest colonoscopy-related adverse events. We identified severe adverse events with and without admission to hospital. Results We included 16 552 outpatient colonoscopies performed at 21 hospitals. A total of 11 248 procedures (68 %) were accompanied by a patient feedback report, of which 2628 (23 %) had free-text comments (2196 [20 %] characterized as positive and 432 [3.8 %] as negative). These negative free texts on patient reports revealed 15 post-colonoscopy hospital admissions due to adverse events that had not been registered in the colonoscopy report. This increased the number of hospital admissions caused by adverse events from 3 (0.03 %) to 18 (0.16 %). In addition, there were 14 patient reports of severe events without hospital admission. Therefore, a total of 29 severe adverse events reported by patients were missed by conventional documentation in the colonoscopy form. Conclusion It is feasible to implement patient feedback as routine reporting to capture the full picture of colonoscopy-related adverse events. Some patients experience significant complications that are not recorded through any registries. Patient feedback forms should be tailored to capture adverse events after colonoscopy that are otherwise not easily disclosed. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28445903     DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-105265

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  4 in total

1.  Diagnosing colorectal cancer in primary care: cohort study in Sweden of qualitative faecal immunochemical tests, haemoglobin levels, and platelet counts.

Authors:  Cecilia Högberg; Ulf Gunnarsson; Stefan Jansson; Hans Thulesius; Olof Cronberg; Mikael Lilja
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Qualitative faecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for diagnosing colorectal cancer in patients with histories of rectal bleeding in primary care: a cohort study.

Authors:  Cecilia Högberg; Ulf Gunnarsson; Olof Cronberg; Hans Thulesius; Mikael Lilja; Stefan Jansson
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Intramural Hematoma and Retroperitoneal Hematoma Following a Routine Colonoscopy: An Uncommon Complication of a Common Procedure.

Authors:  Ayesha Jalal; Pratik Khatiwada; Mohamed Shoreibah; Ryan Dauer
Journal:  Case Rep Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-08-29

4.  Triage May Improve Selection to Colonoscopy and Reduce the Number of Unnecessary Colonoscopies.

Authors:  Mathias M Petersen; Linnea Ferm; Jakob Kleif; Thomas B Piper; Eva Rømer; Ib J Christensen; Hans J Nielsen
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-12       Impact factor: 6.639

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.