STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine how appropriately physicians in 1981 did upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a randomly selected, community-based sample of Medicare patients. DESIGN: We developed a comprehensive and clinically detailed list of 1069 indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. A national panel of nine clinicians rated the appropriateness of the indications. We categorized the indications as appropriate, inappropriate, or equivocal. We did a clinically detailed medical record review of a random sample of 1585 patients having upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to assess the appropriateness of using upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. SETTING: Patients were sampled from large geographic areas in three states. Two areas represented high use, and one area, low use. PATIENTS: Random sample of patients 65 years of age or older receiving diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: None; the study was retrospective. MEASUREMENT AND RESULTS: Patient characteristics, histories, and clinical indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were similar across low- and high-use areas. Overall, 72% of the endoscopies were done for appropriate indications, 11% for equivocal indications, and 17% for inappropriate indications. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (26%), follow-up to an abnormal upper gastrointestinal series (21%), dysphagia (18%), and dyspepsia (15%) were the most frequent clinical reasons for doing endoscopy. Inpatient endoscopies were more often appropriate and less often inappropriate than outpatient endoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of practice patterns among study sites provides the clinical basis for understanding the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The finding of 17% inappropriate use may be cause for concern.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine how appropriately physicians in 1981 did upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a randomly selected, community-based sample of Medicare patients. DESIGN: We developed a comprehensive and clinically detailed list of 1069 indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. A national panel of nine clinicians rated the appropriateness of the indications. We categorized the indications as appropriate, inappropriate, or equivocal. We did a clinically detailed medical record review of a random sample of 1585 patients having upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to assess the appropriateness of using upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. SETTING:Patients were sampled from large geographic areas in three states. Two areas represented high use, and one area, low use. PATIENTS: Random sample of patients 65 years of age or older receiving diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: None; the study was retrospective. MEASUREMENT AND RESULTS:Patient characteristics, histories, and clinical indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were similar across low- and high-use areas. Overall, 72% of the endoscopies were done for appropriate indications, 11% for equivocal indications, and 17% for inappropriate indications. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (26%), follow-up to an abnormal upper gastrointestinal series (21%), dysphagia (18%), and dyspepsia (15%) were the most frequent clinical reasons for doing endoscopy. Inpatient endoscopies were more often appropriate and less often inappropriate than outpatient endoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of practice patterns among study sites provides the clinical basis for understanding the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The finding of 17% inappropriate use may be cause for concern.