|
1
|
Kuriakose Kuzhiyanjal AJ, Rhodes S, Liu E, Limdi JK. Endoscopic Scoring in Ulcerative Colitis: Evaluating Practice Patterns and Role of Educational Interventions. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2025; 86:1-12. [PMID: 40405852 DOI: 10.12968/hmed.2024.0859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/24/2025]
Abstract
Aims/Background Endoscopic scoring systems are recommended internationally for assessing disease activity, response to therapy and mucosal healing. However, their real-world application remains inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of an educational intervention on endoscopic scoring documentation and identify factors influencing its use. Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted at four hospital sites in Greater Manchester, UK. Data from endoscopies performed on ulcerative colitis (UC) patients were compared before and after an educational intervention. Logistic regression was used to analyse factors affecting documentation rates. Results Endoscopic score documentation increased from 39% (pre-intervention) to 46% (post-intervention) (p = 0.162). Nurse endoscopists had the highest documentation rates (83%), while surgeons had the lowest (8%). Attendance at educational sessions significantly increased documentation rates (29% vs. 74-80%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Educational interventions modestly improved endoscopic scoring documentation. Further targeted training and standardised reporting templates are needed to enhance adherence and patient outcomes in UC management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sarah Rhodes
- Centre for Biostatistics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Eleanor Liu
- Division of Gastroenterology-Section of IBD, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Jimmy K Limdi
- Division of Gastroenterology-Section of IBD, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Manchester Academic Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Yen T, Jones B, Espinoza JM, Singh S, Pell J, Duloy A, Wani S, Scott FI, Patel SG. Optimizing Endoscopy Procedure Documentation Improves Guideline-Adherent Care in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Dig Dis Sci 2023; 68:2264-2275. [PMID: 36645637 PMCID: PMC9841959 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-023-07823-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Upper GI bleeding (UGIB) is a common indication for inpatient esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Guideline adherence improves post-EGD care, including appropriate medication dosing/duration and follow-up procedures that reduce UGIB-related morbidity. We aimed to optimize and standardize post-EGD documentation to improve process and clinical outcomes in UGIB-related care. METHODS We performed a prospective quality improvement study of inpatient UGIB endoscopies at an academic tertiary referral center during 6/2019-7/2021. Guidelines were used to develop etiology/severity-specific electronic health record note templates. Participants (39 faculty/15 trainees) completed 10-min training in template content/use. We collected pre/post-intervention process data on "Minimal Standard Report" (MSR) documentation including patient disposition, diet, and medications. We also recorded documentation of re-bleed precautions and follow-up procedures. Study outcomes included guideline-based medication prescriptions, ordering of follow-up EGD, and post-discharge re-bleeding. Pre/post-intervention analysis was performed using chi-square tests. RESULTS From a pre-intervention baseline of 199 patients to 459 patients post-intervention, compliance improved with inpatient PPI (53.4-77.9%, p < 0.001) and discharge PPI (31.3-61.0%, p < 0.001) prescriptions. There was improvement in MSR completion (28.6-42.5%, p < 0.001). Compliance improved with octreotide prescriptions (75.0-93.6%, p = 0.002) and follow-up EGD order (61.3-87.1%, p < 0.001). There was no change in post-discharge re-bleeding. 82.6% of cases used templates. CONCLUSIONS Our project leveraged endoscopy software to standardize documentation, resulting in improved clinical care behavior and efficiency. Our intervention required low burden of maintenance, and sustainability with high utilization over 9 months. Similar endoscopy templates can be applied to other health systems and procedures to improve care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Yen
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Blake Jones
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Jeannine M. Espinoza
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Sarguni Singh
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, Aurora, CO USA
| | - Jonathan Pell
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, Aurora, CO USA
| | - Anna Duloy
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Sachin Wani
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Frank I. Scott
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
| | - Swati G. Patel
- grid.430503.10000 0001 0703 675XDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, 12631 E 17Th Avenue, B158, Aurora, CO 80045 USA ,grid.422100.50000 0000 9751 469XRocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, CO USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Takayama H, Takao T, Masumura R, Yamaguchi Y, Yonezawa R, Sakaguchi H, Morita Y, Toyonaga T, Izumiyama K, Kodama Y. Speech Recognition System Generates Highly Accurate Endoscopic Reports in Clinical Practice. Intern Med 2023; 62:153-157. [PMID: 35732450 PMCID: PMC9908383 DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.9592-22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective Endoscopic reports are conventionally written at the end of each procedure, and the endoscopist must complete the report from memory. To make endoscopic reporting more efficient, we developed a new speech recognition (SR) system that generates highly accurate endoscopic reports based on structured data entry. We conducted a pilot study to examine the performance of this SR system in an actual endoscopy setting with various types of background noise. Methods In this prospective observational pilot study, participants who underwent upper endoscopy with our SR system were included. The primary outcome was the correct recognition rate of the system. We compared the findings generated by the SR system with the findings in the handwritten report prepared by the endoscopist. The initial correct recognition rate, number of revisions, finding registration time, and endoscopy time were also analyzed. Results Upper endoscopy was performed in 34 patients, generating 128 findings of 22 disease names. The correct recognition rate was 100%, and the median number of revisions was 0. The median finding registration time was 2.57 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.33-2.92] seconds, and the median endoscopy time was 234 (IQR, 194-227) seconds. Conclusion The SR system demonstrated high recognition accuracy in the clinical setting. The finding registration time was extremely short.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiroshi Takayama
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
| | - Toshitatsu Takao
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
| | - Ryo Masumura
- NTT Computer and Data Science Laboratories, NTT Corporation, Japan
| | | | - Ryo Yonezawa
- System Solution Headquarters, Fujifilm Medical IT Solutions Co., Ltd, Japan
| | - Hiroya Sakaguchi
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
| | - Yoshinori Morita
- Department of Gastroenterology, Kobe University Hospital International Clinical Cancer Research Center, Japan
| | - Takashi Toyonaga
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
| | | | - Yuzo Kodama
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Lightdale JR, Walsh CM, Oliva S, Jacobson K, Huynh HQ, Homan M, Hojsak I, Gillett PM, Furlano RI, Fishman DS, Croft NM, Brill H, Bontems P, Amil-Dias J, Utterson EC, Tavares M, Rosh JR, Riley MR, Narula P, Mamula P, Mack DR, Liu QY, Lerner DG, Leibowitz IH, Otley AR, Kramer RE, Ambartsumyan L, Connan V, McCreath GA, Thomson MA. Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopic Procedures: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2022; 74:S30-S43. [PMID: 34402486 DOI: 10.1097/mpg.0000000000003264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION High-quality pediatric gastrointestinal procedures are performed when clinically indicated and defined by their successful performance by skilled providers in a safe, comfortable, child-oriented, and expeditious manner. The process of pediatric endoscopy begins when a plan to perform the procedure is first made and ends when all appropriate patient follow-up has occurred. Procedure-related standards and indicators developed to date for endoscopy in adults emphasize cancer screening and are thus unsuitable for pediatric medicine. METHODS With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of endoscopic procedures. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process and finalized at an in-person conference. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. RESULTS The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 14 standards for pediatric endoscopic procedures, as well as 30 indicators that can be used to identify high-quality procedures. These were subcategorized into three subdomains: Preprocedural (3 standards, 7 indicators), Intraprocedural (8 standards, 18 indicators), and Postprocedural (3 standards, 5 indicators). A minimum target for the key indicator, "rate of adequate bowel preparation," was set at ≥80%. DISCUSSION It is recommended that all facilities and individual providers performing pediatric endoscopy worldwide initiate and engage with the procedure-related standards and indicators developed by PEnQuIN to identify gaps in quality and drive improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenifer R Lightdale
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, UMass Memorial Children's Medical Center, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
| | - Catharine M Walsh
- Department of Paediatrics and the Wilson Centre, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the Research and Learning Institutes, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Salvatore Oliva
- Pediatric Gastroenterology and Liver Unit, Maternal and Child Health Department, Umberto I - University Hospital, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Kevan Jacobson
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, British Columbia's Children's Hospital and British Columbia Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Hien Q Huynh
- Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Stollery Children's Hospital, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Matjaž Homan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Hepatology and Nutrition, University Children's Hospital, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Iva Hojsak
- Referral Center for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital Zagreb, University of Zagreb Medical School, Zagreb, University J.J. Strossmayer Medical School, Osijek, Croatia
| | - Peter M Gillett
- Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Raoul I Furlano
- Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, University Children's Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Douglas S Fishman
- Section of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Nicholas M Croft
- Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Herbert Brill
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology & Nutrition, McMaster Children's Hospital, McMaster University, William Osler Health System, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Patrick Bontems
- Division of Pediatrics, Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Queen Fabiola Children's University Hospital, ICBAS - Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jorge Amil-Dias
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Centro Hospitalar Universitário S. João, Porto, Portugal
| | - Elizabeth C Utterson
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine/St. Louis Children's Hospital, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Marta Tavares
- Division of Pediatrics, Pediatric Gastroenterology Department, Centro Materno Infantil do Norte, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, ICBAS - Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Porto, Portugal
| | - Joel R Rosh
- Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Goryeb Children's Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Morristown, NJ, United States
| | - Matthew R Riley
- Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Providence St. Vincent's Medical Center, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Priya Narula
- Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| | - Petar Mamula
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - David R Mack
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Quin Y Liu
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medicine and Pediatrics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Diana G Lerner
- Division of Pediatrics, Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's of Wisconsin, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States
| | - Ian H Leibowitz
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's National Medical Center, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Anthony R Otley
- Gastroenterology & Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, IWK Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Robert E Kramer
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Colorado, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States
| | - Lusine Ambartsumyan
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Seattle Children's Hospital, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Veronik Connan
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Graham A McCreath
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mike A Thomson
- Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Walsh CM, Lightdale JR, Fishman DS, Furlano RI, Mamula P, Gillett PM, Narula P, Hojsak I, Oliva S, Homan M, Riley MR, Huynh HQ, Rosh JR, Jacobson K, Tavares M, Leibowitz IH, Utterson EC, Croft NM, Mack DR, Brill H, Liu QY, Bontems P, Lerner DG, Amil-Dias J, Kramer RE, Otley AR, Ambartsumyan L, Connan V, McCreath GA, Thomson MA. Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Pediatric Endoscopy Reporting Elements: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2022; 74:S53-S62. [PMID: 34402488 DOI: 10.1097/mpg.0000000000003266] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION High-quality procedure reports are a cornerstone of high-quality pediatric endoscopy as they ensure the clear communication of procedural events and outcomes, guide patient care and facilitate continuous quality improvement. The aim of this document is to outline standardized reporting elements that achieved international consensus as requirements for high-quality pediatric endoscopy procedure reports. METHODS With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used Delphi methodology to identify key elements that should be found in all pediatric endoscopy reports. Item reduction was attained through iterative rounds of anonymized online voting using a 6-point scale. Responses were analyzed after each round and items were excluded from subsequent rounds if ≤50% of panelists rated them as 5 ("agree moderately") or 6 ("agree strongly"). Reporting elements that ≥70% of panelists rated as "agree moderately" or "agree strongly" were considered to have achieved consensus. RESULTS Twenty-six PEnQuIN group members from 25 centers internationally rated 63 potential reporting elements that were generated from a systematic literature review and the Delphi panelists. The response rates were 100% for all three survey rounds. Thirty reporting elements reached consensus as essential for inclusion within a pediatric endoscopy report. DISCUSSION It is recommended that the PEnQuIN Reporting Elements for pediatric endoscopy be universally employed across all endoscopists, procedures and facilities as a foundational means of ensuring high-quality endoscopy services, while facilitating quality improvement activities in pediatric endoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catharine M Walsh
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the Research and Learning Institutes, The Hospital for Sick Children, Department of Paediatrics and the Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jenifer R Lightdale
- Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, UMass Memorial Children's Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States
| | - Douglas S Fishman
- Section of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Raoul I Furlano
- Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, University Children's Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Petar Mamula
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Peter M Gillett
- Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Priya Narula
- Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| | - Iva Hojsak
- Referral Center for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital Zagreb, University of Zagreb Medical School, Zagreb, University J.J. Strossmayer Medical School, Osijek, Croatia
| | - Salvatore Oliva
- Pediatric Gastroenterology and Liver Unit, Maternal and Child Health Department, Umberto I - University Hospital, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Matjaž Homan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University Children's Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Matthew R Riley
- Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Providence St. Vincent's Medical Center, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Hien Q Huynh
- Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Stollery Children's Hospital, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Joel R Rosh
- Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Goryeb Children's Hospital, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Morristown, NJ, United States
| | - Kevan Jacobson
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, British Columbia's Children's Hospital and British Columbia Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Marta Tavares
- Division of Pediatrics, Pediatric Gastroenterology Department, Centro Materno Infantil do Norte, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, ICBAS - Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Porto, Portugal
| | - Ian H Leibowitz
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's National Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Elizabeth C Utterson
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine/St. Louis Children's Hospital, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Nicholas M Croft
- Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - David R Mack
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Department of Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Herbert Brill
- Division of Gastroenterology & Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, McMaster Children's Hospital, McMaster University, Department of Paediatrics, William Osler Health System, Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Quin Y Liu
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medicine and Pediatrics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Patrick Bontems
- Division of Pediatrics, Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Queen Fabiola Children's University Hospital, ICBAS - Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Diana G Lerner
- Division of Pediatrics, Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Children's of Wisconsin, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States
| | - Jorge Amil-Dias
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Centro Hospitalar Universitário S. João, Porto, Portugal
| | - Robert E Kramer
- Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Colorado, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States
| | - Anthony R Otley
- Gastroenterology & Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, IWK Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Lusine Ambartsumyan
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Seattle Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Veronik Connan
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Graham A McCreath
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mike A Thomson
- Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Sheffield Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Adamina M, Feakins R, Iacucci M, Spinelli A, Cannatelli R, D'Hoore A, Driessen A, Katsanos K, Mookhoek A, Myrelid P, Pellino G, Peros G, Tontini GE, Tripathi M, Yanai H, Svrcek M. ECCO Topical Review Optimising Reporting in Surgery, Endoscopy, and Histopathology. J Crohns Colitis 2021; 15:1089-1105. [PMID: 33428711 DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] requires a lifelong multidisciplinary approach. The quality of medical reporting is crucial in this context. The present topical review addresses the need for optimised reporting in endoscopy, surgery, and histopathology. METHODS A consensus expert panel consisting of gastroenterologists, surgeons, and pathologists, convened by the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation, performed a systematic literature review. The following topics were covered: in endoscopy: [i] general IBD endoscopy; [ii] disease activity and surveillance; [iii] endoscopy treatment in IBD; in surgery: [iv] medical history with surgical relevance, surgical indication, and strategy; [v] operative approach; [vi] intraoperative disease description; [vii] operative steps; in pathology: [viii] macroscopic assessment and interpretation of resection specimens; [ix] IBD histology, including biopsies, surgical resections, and neoplasia; [x] IBD histology conclusion and report. Statements were developed using a Delphi methodology incorporating two consecutive rounds. Current practice positions were set when ≥ 80% of participants agreed on a recommendation. RESULTS Thirty practice positions established a standard terminology for optimal reporting in endoscopy, surgery, and histopathology. Assessment of disease activity, surveillance recommendations, advice to surgeons for operative indication and strategies, including margins and extent of resection, and diagnostic criteria of IBD, as well as guidance for the interpretation of dysplasia and cancer, were handled. A standardised report including a core set of items to include in each specialty report, was defined. CONCLUSIONS Interdisciplinary high-quality care requires thorough and standardised reporting across specialties. This topical review offers an actionable framework and practice recommendations to optimise reporting in endoscopy, surgery, and histopathology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michel Adamina
- Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Roger Feakins
- Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - Marietta Iacucci
- Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Birmingham, UK
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, UK
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano,Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - Rosanna Cannatelli
- Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Gastroenterology Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - André D'Hoore
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Ann Driessen
- Department of Pathology, University Hospital Antwerp, University Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium
| | - Konstantinos Katsanos
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University and Medical School of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Aart Mookhoek
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pär Myrelid
- Department of Surgery, and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Gianluca Pellino
- Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Universitá degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Naples, Italy
- Colorectal Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Georgios Peros
- Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital of Winterthur, Winterthur, Switerland; Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Gian Eugenio Tontini
- Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy
- Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Monika Tripathi
- Department of Histopathology, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Henit Yanai
- Division of Gastroenterology, IBD Center, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel
| | - Magali Svrcek
- Department of Pathology, Sorbonne Université, AP-HP, Saint-Antoine hospital, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Kader R, Dart RJ, Sebepos‐Rogers G, Shakweh E, Middleton P, McGuire J, Pavlidis P, Ahmad OF, GLINT Research Network, Segal J, Samaan MA, Gahir J, Black G, Theaker H, Calderbank T, Meade S, Ibraheim H, Clough J, Bancil A, Honap S, Hampal R, Tavabie O, Tai C, Tern P, Akbar S, Patel R, Rhead C, Kabir M, Bashyam M, Fofaria R, Hiner G, Ravindran S, Walton H, King J, Dhillon A, Seller P, Mukherjee S, Harlow C. Implementation of an intervention bundle leads to quality improvement in ulcerative colitis endoscopy reporting. GASTROHEP 2020; 2:309-317. [DOI: 10.1002/ygh2.427] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Rawen Kader
- Gastroenterology University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust London UK
| | - Robin J. Dart
- Gastroenterology Department Royal Free Hospital London UK
- School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences King's College London London UK
| | | | - Eathar Shakweh
- Gastroenterology Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust London UK
| | - Paul Middleton
- Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction Imperial College London London UK
| | - Joshua McGuire
- Gastroenterology University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust London UK
| | - Polychronis Pavlidis
- School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences King's College London London UK
- Gastroenterology Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust London UK
| | - Omer F. Ahmad
- Gastroenterology University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust London UK
| | | | - Jonathan Segal
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology St Mary’s Hospital London UK
| | - Mark A. Samaan
- Gastroenterology Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust London UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Limdi JK, Picco M, Farraye FA. A review of endoscopic scoring systems and their importance in a treat-to-target approach in inflammatory bowel disease (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:733-745. [PMID: 31786161 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.11.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2019] [Accepted: 11/19/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Endoscopic assessment is currently the criterion standard for the diagnosis and assessment of mucosal disease activity, prognosis and monitoring for dysplasia, and assessment of response to therapy. Wider appreciation of the potential disconnect between symptoms and objective measures of disease activity and evidence that uncontrolled inflammation may lead to progressive intestinal injury and irreversible bowel damage with adverse events has led to the concept of treating to target. Treating to target is defined as treating patients with high risk for disease progression early to prevent or limit intestinal injury or disability. Endoscopic remission (mucosal healing) has emerged as a key goal of therapy. Although there are no currently validated definitions of endoscopic mucosal remission, the use of endoscopic scoring systems add uniformity and objectivity and aid standardization with reporting of mucosal appearance, augmenting clinical decision making. A plethora of scoring systems exist to define activity, response, and remission in both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. In this review, we discuss the most commonly used endoscopic scoring systems and proposed definitions of response and remission, and how they can be integrated into a treat-to-target approach to optimize patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jimmy K Limdi
- The Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Picco
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Francis A Farraye
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Tamilarasan AG, Cunningham G, Irving PM, Samaan MA. Recent advances in monoclonal antibody therapy in IBD: practical issues. Frontline Gastroenterol 2019; 10:409-416. [PMID: 31656567 PMCID: PMC6788124 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2018-101054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2018] [Revised: 12/13/2018] [Accepted: 12/14/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
The advent of monoclonal antibody therapies has revolutionised inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment and delivered great benefits to patients. The optimal use of this class of drugs requires careful management and a clear understanding of their properties. In this review article, we consider how to maximise the benefit of our most novel biological agents, vedolizumab and ustekinumab. For each agent, we consider practical aspects including dose flexibility, evidence for use in combination with a conventional immunomodulator and the potential role of therapeutic drug monitoring. We also address positioning of the various mechanisms and agents in treatment algorithms as well as important aspects of managing patients receiving monoclonal antibodies, such as disease reassessment. Finally, we look ahead to the future of monoclonal antibodies, where not only have biosimilars increased the number of agents available but there are also a range of novel mechanisms currently in late phase clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Mark A Samaan
- IBD Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Eskeland SL, Brunborg C, Rueegg CS, Aabakken L, de Lange T. Assessment of the effect of an Interactive Dynamic Referral Interface (IDRI) on the quality of referral letters from general practitioners to gastroenterologists: a randomised cross-over vignette trial. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e014636. [PMID: 28667208 PMCID: PMC5734248 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2016] [Revised: 05/06/2017] [Accepted: 05/30/2017] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We evaluated whether interactive, electronic, dynamic, diagnose-specific checklists improve the quality of referral letters in gastroenterology and assessed the general practitioners' (GPs') acceptance of the checklists. DESIGN Randomised cross-over vignette trial. SETTING Primary care in Norway. PARTICIPANTS 25 GPs. INTERVENTION The GPs participated in the trial and were asked to refer eight clinical vignettes in an internet-based electronic health record simulator. A referral support, consisting of dynamic diagnose-specific checklists, was created for the generation of referral letters to gastroenterologists. The GPs were randomised to refer the eight vignettes with or without the checklists. After a minimum of 3 months, they repeated the referral process with the alternative method. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Difference in quality of the referral letters between referrals with and without checklists, measured with an objective Thirty Point Score (TPS).Difference in variance in the quality of the referral letters and GPs' acceptance of the electronic dynamic user interface. RESULTS The mean TPS was 15.2 (95% CI 13.2 to 16.3) and 22.0 (95% CI 20.6 to 22.8) comparing referrals without and with checklist assistance (p<0.001), respectively. The coefficient of variance was 23.3% for the checklist group and 39.6% for the non-checklist group. Two-thirds (16/24) of the GPs thought they had included more relevant information in the referrals with checklists, and considered implementing this type of checklists in their clinical practices, if available. CONCLUSIONS Dynamic, diagnose-specific checklists improved the quality of referral letters significantly and reduced the variance of the TPS, indicating a more uniform quality when checklists were used. The GPs were generally positive to the checklists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sigrun Losada Eskeland
- Department of Medical Research, Bærum Hospital, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Cathrine Brunborg
- Department of Biostatistics, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Corina Silvia Rueegg
- Department of Biostatistics, Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lars Aabakken
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Section of GI Endoscopy, Division of Surgery, Inflammatory Medicine and Transplantation, Oslo University Hospital Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Thomas de Lange
- Department of Medicine, Bærum Hospital, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway
- Departement of Bowel Cancer Screening, Cancer Registry of Norway, Majorstuen, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
López-Picazo J, Alberca de Las Parras F, Sánchez Del Río A, Pérez Romero S, León Molina J, Júdez FJ. Quality indicators in digestive endoscopy: introduction to structure, process, and outcome common indicators. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE ENFERMEDADES DIGESTIVAS 2017; 109:435-450. [PMID: 28553719 DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.5035/2017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
The general goal of the project wherein this paper is framed is the proposal of useful quality and safety procedures and indicators to facilitate quality improvement in digestive endoscopy units. This initial offspring sets forth procedures and indicators common to all digestive endoscopy procedures. First, a diagram of pre- and post-digestive endoscopy steps was developed. A group of health care quality and/or endoscopy experts under the auspices of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (Spanish Society of Digestive Diseases) carried out a qualitative review of the literature regarding the search for quality indicators in endoscopic procedures. Then, a paired analysis was used for the selection of literature references and their subsequent review. Twenty indicators were identified, including seven for structure, eleven for process (five pre-procedure, three intra-procedure, three post-procedure), and two for outcome. Quality of evidence was analyzed for each indicator using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julio López-Picazo
- Servicio de Calidad Asistencial, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca
| | | | | | - Shirley Pérez Romero
- Servicio de Calidad Asistencial, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Devlin SM, Melmed GY, Irving PM, Rubin DT, Kornbluth A, Kozuch PL, Raffals LE, Velayos FS, Sparrow MP, Baidoo L, Bressler B, Cheifetz AS, Jones J, Kaplan GG, Siegel CA. Recommendations for Quality Colonoscopy Reporting for Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Results from a RAND Appropriateness Panel. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2016; 22:1418-1424. [PMID: 27057680 DOI: 10.1097/mib.0000000000000764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Consensus on what constitutes a quality colonoscopy report for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is lacking. We developed a template for quality colonoscopy reporting that can be used broadly by endoscopists. METHODS After a literature review of topics relevant to colonoscopy reporting, members of the Building Research in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Globally (BRIDGe) group and 2 external experts proposed candidate reporting elements. The RAND/University of California, Los Angeles appropriateness method was applied to rate the importance and feasibility of elements for inclusion in colonoscopy reports for patients with IBD. Panelists used the modified Delphi method to anonymously rate the importance and feasibility of candidate elements on a 1-to-9 scale (1-3: not important/feasible, 4-6: moderately important/feasible, 7-9: very important/feasible). Disagreement was assessed using a validated index. The panelists then met in person for discussion followed by a second round of voting. Elements rated a median of 7 or higher on importance after rerating were retained. RESULTS One hundred two reporting elements were proposed. A total of 48 elements were retained across the four themes of "disease background," "findings and interventions," "Crohn's disease with an ileocolonic anastomosis," and "pouchoscopy." CONCLUSIONS A comprehensive list of recommended elements for quality IBD colonoscopy reporting stratified by clinical scenario has been described, using a rigorous and evidence-based approach. These elements can be incorporated into endoscopy reporting software platforms. Standardized endoscopy reporting may improve the quality of care in IBD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shane M Devlin
- *The University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; †Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; ‡Inflammatory Bowel Disease Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals, London, United Kingdom; §Department of Medicine, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; ‖Dr. Henry D. Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York; ¶Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; **Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; ††University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California; ‡‡Department of Gastroenterology, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; §§University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; ‖‖University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; ¶¶Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; ***Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; and †††Inflammatory Bowel Disease Centre, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Bretthauer M, Aabakken L, Dekker E, Kaminski MF, Rösch T, Hultcrantz R, Suchanek S, Jover R, Kuipers EJ, Bisschops R, Spada C, Valori R, Domagk D, Rees C, Rutter MD. Reporting systems in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Requirements and standards facilitating quality improvement: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy position statement. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4:172-6. [PMID: 27087943 DOI: 10.1177/2050640616629079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
To develop standards for high quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has established the ESGE Quality Improvement Committee. A prerequisite for quality assurance and improvement for all gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures is state-of-the-art integrated digital reporting systems for standardized documentation of the procedures. The current paper describes the ESGE's viewpoints on requirements for high-quality endoscopy reporting systems. The following recommendations are issued: Endoscopy reporting systems must be electronic.Endoscopy reporting systems should be integrated into hospital patient record systems.Endoscopy reporting systems should include patient identifiers to facilitate data linkage to other data sources.Endoscopy reporting systems shall restrict the use of free text entry to a minimum, and be based mainly on structured data entry.Separate entry of data for quality or research purposes is discouraged. Automatic data transfer for quality and research purposes must be facilitated.Double entry of data by the endoscopist or associate personnel is discouraged. Available data from outside sources (administrative or medical) must be made available automatically.Endoscopy reporting systems shall enable the inclusion of information on histopathology of detected lesions; patient's satisfaction; adverse events; surveillance recommendations.Endoscopy reporting systems must facilitate easy data retrieval at any time in a universally compatible format.Endoscopy reporting systems must include data fields for key performance indicators as defined by quality improvement committees.Endoscopy reporting systems must facilitate changes in indicators and data entry fields as required by professional organizations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Bretthauer
- Department of Health Management and Health Economy and KG Jebsen Centre for Colorectal Cancer, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lars Aabakken
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Michal F Kaminski
- Department of Health Management and Health Economy and KG Jebsen Centre for Colorectal Cancer, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology, and Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Thomas Rösch
- Department of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Rolf Hultcrantz
- Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Stepan Suchanek
- Department of Internal Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Rodrigo Jover
- Unidad de Gastroenterologia, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
| | - Ernst J Kuipers
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Raf Bisschops
- Gastroenterology Department, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Roland Valori
- Department of Gastroenterology, Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, Gloucester, UK
| | - Dirk Domagk
- Department of Internal Medicine, Joseph's Hospital, Warendorf, Germany
| | - Colin Rees
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, UK; School of Medicine, Durham University, UK
| | - Matthew D Rutter
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton-on-Tees, UK; School of Medicine, Durham University, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Nguyen GC, Devlin SM, Afif W, Bressler B, Gruchy SE, Kaplan GG, Oliveira L, Plamondon S, Seow CH, Williams C, Wong K, Yan BM, Jones J. Defining quality indicators for best-practice management of inflammatory bowel disease in Canada. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 28:275-85. [PMID: 24839622 PMCID: PMC4049258 DOI: 10.1155/2014/941245] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2014] [Accepted: 02/23/2014] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a paucity of published data regarding the quality of care of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Canada. Clinical quality indicators are quantitative end points used to guide, monitor and improve the quality of patient care. In Canada, where universal health care can vary significantly among provinces, quality indicators can be used to identify potential gaps in the delivery of IBD care and standardize the approach to interprovincial management. METHODS The Emerging Practice in IBD Collaborative (EPIC) group generated a shortlist of IBD quality indicators based on a comprehensive literature review. An iterative voting process was used to select quality indicators to take forward. In a face-to-face meeting with the EPIC group, available evidence to support each quality indicator was presented by the EPIC member aligned to it, followed by group discussion to agree on the wording of the statements. The selected quality indicators were then ratified in a final vote by all EPIC members. RESULTS Eleven quality indicators for the management of IBD within the single-payer health care system of Canada were developed. These focus on accurate diagnosis, appropriate and timely management, disease monitoring, and prevention or treatment of complications of IBD or its therapy. CONCLUSIONS These quality indicators are measurable, reflective of the evidence base and expert opinion, and define a standard of care that is at least a minimum that should be expected for IBD management in Canada. The next steps for the EPIC group involve conducting research to assess current practice across Canada as it pertains to these quality indicators and to measure the impact of each of these indicators on patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geoffrey C Nguyen
- Mount Sinai Hospital Centre for Inflammatory Bowel Disease, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario
| | - Shane M Devlin
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
| | - Waqqas Afif
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Quebec
| | - Brian Bressler
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia
| | - Steven E Gruchy
- Division of Gastroenterology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia
| | - Gilaad G Kaplan
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
| | | | - Sophie Plamondon
- Division of Gastroenterology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke and Centre de Recherche Étienne-LeBel, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec
| | - Cynthia H Seow
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta
| | - Chadwick Williams
- Division of Gastroenterology, Saint John Regional Hospital, Saint John, New Brunswick
| | - Karen Wong
- Mount Saint Joseph Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia
| | - Brian M Yan
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario
| | - Jennifer Jones
- Multidisciplinary IBD Program, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Endoscopy reporting standards. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY = JOURNAL CANADIEN DE GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2014; 27:286-92. [PMID: 23712304 DOI: 10.1155/2013/145894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
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.
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Beaulieu D, Barkun A, Martel M. Quality audit of colonoscopy reports amongst patients screened or surveilled for colorectal neoplasia. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18:3551-7. [PMID: 22826619 PMCID: PMC3400856 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i27.3551] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2011] [Revised: 03/09/2012] [Accepted: 05/06/2012] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM: To complete a quality audit using recently published criteria from the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable.
METHODS: Consecutive colonoscopy reports of patients at average/high risk screening, or with a prior colorectal neoplasia (CRN) by endoscopists who perform 11 000 procedures yearly, using a commercial computerized endoscopic report generator. A separate institutional database providing pathological results. Required documentation included patient demographics, history, procedure indications, technical descriptions, colonoscopy findings, interventions, unplanned events, follow-up plans, and pathology results. Reports abstraction employed a standardized glossary with 10% independent data validation. Sample size calculations determined the number of reports needed.
RESULTS: Two hundreds and fifty patients (63.2 ± 10.5 years, female: 42.8%, average risk: 38.5%, personal/family history of CRN: 43.3%/20.2%) were scoped in June 2009 by 8 gastroenterologists and 3 surgeons (mean practice: 17.1 ± 8.5 years). Procedural indication and informed consent were always documented. 14% provided a previous colonoscopy date (past polyp removal information in 25%, but insufficient in most to determine surveillance intervals appropriateness). Most procedural indicators were recorded (exam date: 98.4%, medications: 99.2%, difficulty level: 98.8%, prep quality: 99.6%). All reports noted extent of visualization (cecum: 94.4%, with landmarks noted in 78.8% - photodocumentation: 67.2%). No procedural times were recorded. One hundred and eleven had polyps (44.4%) with anatomic location noted in 99.1%, size in 65.8%, morphology in 62.2%; removal was by cold biopsy in 25.2% (cold snare: 18%, snare cautery: 31.5%, unrecorded: 20.7%), 84.7% were retrieved. Adenomas were noted in 24.8% (advanced adenomas: 7.6%, cancer: 0.4%) in this population with varying previous colonic investigations.
CONCLUSION: This audit reveals lacking reported items, justifying additional research to optimize quality of reporting.
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Armstrong D, Barkun A, Bridges R, Carter R, de Gara C, Dube C, Enns R, Hollingworth R, Macintosh D, Borgaonkar M, Forget S, Leontiadis G, Meddings J, Cotton P, Kuipers EJ. Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY = JOURNAL CANADIEN DE GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2012; 26:17-31. [PMID: 22308578 PMCID: PMC3275402 DOI: 10.1155/2012/173739] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2011] [Accepted: 10/04/2011] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Increasing use of gastrointestinal endoscopy, particularly for colorectal cancer screening, and increasing emphasis on health care quality, highlight the need for clearly defined, evidence-based processes to support quality improvement in endoscopy. OBJECTIVE To identify processes and indicators of quality and safety relevant to high-quality endoscopy service delivery. METHODS A multidisciplinary group of 35 voting participants developed recommendation statements and performance indicators. Systematic literature searches generated 50 initial statements that were revised iteratively following a modified Delphi approach using a web-based evaluation and voting tool. Statement development and evidence evaluation followed the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, REsearch and Evaluation) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) guidelines. At the consensus conference, participants voted anonymously on all statements using a 6-point scale. Subsequent web-based voting evaluated recommendations for specific, individual quality indicators, safety indicators and mandatory endoscopy reporting fields. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by 80% of participants. RESULTS Consensus was reached on 23 recommendation statements addressing the following: ethics (statement 1: agreement 100%), facility standards and policies (statements 2 to 9: 90% to 100%), quality assurance (statements 10 to 13: 94% to 100%), training, education, competency and privileges (statements 14 to 19: 97% to 100%), endoscopy reporting standards (statements 20 and 21: 97% to 100%) and patient perceptions (statements 22 and 23: 100%). Additionally, 18 quality indicators (agreement 83% to 100%), 20 safety indicators (agreement 77% to 100%) and 23 recommended endoscopy-reporting elements (agreement 91% to 100%) were identified. DISCUSSION The consensus process identified a clear need for high-quality clinical and outcomes research to support quality improvement in the delivery of endoscopy services. CONCLUSIONS The guidelines support quality improvement in endoscopy by providing explicit recommendations on systematic monitoring, assessment and modification of endoscopy service delivery to yield benefits for all patients affected by the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Armstrong
- Division of Gastroenterrology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Asfeldt AM, Straume B, Paulssen EJ. Impact of observer variability on the usefulness of endoscopic images for the documentation of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Scand J Gastroenterol 2007; 42:1106-12. [PMID: 17710678 DOI: 10.1080/00365520701259240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Endoscopy is an observer-dependent diagnostic method, which, until recently, has lacked precise guidelines for written reports. There is an increasing demand for improvement in endoscopy records, which may necessitate the supplementation of image documentation. The aim of this study was to estimate interobserver as well as intra-observer variability in the assessment of images from gastroscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS We designed an Internet interface presenting endoscopy images, accompanied by a multiple-choice questionnaire for assessing pathology in the images. Ten images from the distal oesophagus and 10 images from the pyloric antrum were chosen. In order to study interobserver variability, physicians with varying endoscopy experience were invited to complete the questionnaire. The physicians were re-invited 5 months later to assess the same images again, this time in order to assess intra-observer variability. Kappa statistics were used for analysis of agreement. RESULTS Initially, 13 of 20 invited physicians responded. Interobserver agreement varied between poor (kappa<0.2) and moderate (0.4<kappa<0.6). In the second part of the study, 10 of 11 invited physicians responded. Intra-observer agreement varied between moderate (0.4<kappa<0.6) and good (0.6<kappa<0.8). A higher level of experience does not imply either better interobserver or better intra-observer agreement. Images of concise endoscopy findings, such as the presence of an ulcer, resulted in better agreement than did the assessment of images of less definable findings. CONCLUSION The variability in the interpretation of endoscopy images is large. We therefore believe that systematic inclusion of a set of images into endoscopy reports will improve their quality.
Collapse
|
|
19
|
de Lange T, Larsen S, Aabakken L. Image documentation of endoscopic findings in ulcerative colitis: photographs or video clips? Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61:715-720. [PMID: 15855977 DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(05)00337-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous studies have shown deficiencies in the endoscopy reports and substantial interobserver variation in the assessments of endoscopic findings. The aim of this study was to determine how to perform systematic digital image documentation in ulcerative colitis and to evaluate if mucosal inflammation is assessed equally on a still image and on a video clip. METHODS Eighteen video clips and their corresponding photographs that visualize different severities of ulcerative colitis were shown in randomized order to 20 experienced endoscopists. They assessed the mucosal inflammation of each image twice on a visual analog scale. Three comparisons were performed between the video clips, the photographs, and the video clips to the photographs, respectively. RESULTS The mean score of the inflammation of the video clips at tape 1 and 2 was 4.74: 95% confidence interval (CI)[4.41, 5.08] and 4.90: 95% CI[4.56, 5.24), respectively, and of the photographs 4.53: 95% CI[4.19, 4.88] and 4.43: 95% CI[4.09, 4.77], respectively. The first answer explains 83% of the variation in the second answer for all comparisons, and the agreement index ranged from 0.38 to 0.42. CONCLUSIONS The mucosal inflammation might be documented nearly as well with a still image as on a video clip. Systematic use of still images probably improves the endoscopy reports by adding more objective information about the mucosal inflammation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas de Lange
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
de Lange T, Larsen S, Aabakken L. Inter-observer agreement in the assessment of endoscopic findings in ulcerative colitis. BMC Gastroenterol 2004; 4:9. [PMID: 15149550 PMCID: PMC434504 DOI: 10.1186/1471-230x-4-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2003] [Accepted: 05/18/2004] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endoscopic findings are essential in evaluating the disease activity in ulcerative colitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate how endoscopists assess individual endoscopic features of mucosal inflammation in ulcerative colitis, the inter-observer agreement, and the importance of the observers' experience. METHODS Five video clips of ulcerative colitis were shown to a group of experienced and a group of inexperienced endoscopists. Both groups were asked to assess eight endoscopic features and the overall mucosal inflammation on a visual analogue scale. The following statistical analyses were used; Contingency tables analysis, kappa analysis, analysis of variance, Pearson linear correlation analysis, general linear models, and agreement analysis. All tests were carried out two-tailed, with a significance level of 5%. RESULTS The inter-observer agreement ranged from very good to moderate in the experienced group and from very good to fair in the inexperienced group. There was a significantly better inter-observer agreement in the experienced group in the rating of 6 out of 9 features (p < 0.05). The experienced and inexperienced endoscopists scored the "ulcerations" significantly different. (p = 0.05). The inter-observer variation of the mean score of "erosions", "ulcerations" and endoscopic activity index in mild disease, and the scoring of "erythema" and "oedema" in moderate-severe disease was significantly higher in the inexperienced group.A correlation was seen between all the observed endoscopic features in both groups of endoscopists. Among experienced endoscopists, a set of four endoscopic variables ("Vascular pattern", "Erosions", "Ulcerations" and Friability") explained 92% of the variation in EAI. By including "Granularity" in these set 91% of the variation in EAI was explained in the group of inexperienced endoscopists. CONCLUSION The inter-observer agreement in the rating of endoscopic features characterising ulcerative colitis is satisfactory in both groups of endoscopists but significantly higher in the experienced group. The difference in the mean score between the two groups is only significant for "ulcerations". The endoscopic variables "Vascular pattern", "Erosions", "Ulcerations" and Friability" explained the overall endoscopic activity index. Even though the present result is quite satisfactory, there is a potential of improvement. Improved grading systems might contribute to improve the consistency of endoscopic descriptions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas de Lange
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Stig Larsen
- Department of Epidemiology, Norwegian School of Veterinary Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | - Lars Aabakken
- Department of Gastroenterology Rikshospitalet University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|