2. Appropriateness of Gastroscopy: Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease 1

Bochud, Murielle; Gonvers, J.-J.; Vader, John‐Paul; Dubois, Robert W.; Burnand, Bernard; Froehlich, Florian

doi:10.1055/s-1999-63

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Guidelines for gastroendotology were developed in line with international guidelines from [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. The themes covered were chronic diarrhea, gastroesophageal reflux disease, abdominal pain, anemia/blood in feces, inflammatory bowel disease and colorectal cancer.…”

Section: The Hospital Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical guidelines as decision support for referrals from primary care

Heimly

Nytrø

2011

2011 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse &Amp; Integration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work describes the use of clinical guidelines in public health care for decision support in a primary care record system. The clinical guidelines were used for decision support in primary care in order to improve the quality of electronic referrals to a hospital. Guidelines were developed by the specialists at the hospital, but the design and the development of the system was done in collaboration with general practitioners working in primary care. This paper sums up the findings from a study six months after the introduction of the decision support system, and is based on interviews with users in primary care. The work processes differed between the practices; General practitioners who wrote the referrals after the patient had left the office did not find the system as useful as the ones who wrote them when the patient was present. The general practitioners were reluctant to use guidelines that resulted in an additional workload in terms of providing the hospital with more information than before, but found the system useful as a support for assuring that they made the right clinical decisions. The guidelines were also seen as useful as a support for refusing to refer the patient to specialized care.

show abstract

Section: The Hospital Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical guidelines as decision support for referrals from primary care

Heimly

Nytrø

2011

2011 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse &Amp; Integration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Glasgow dyspepsia severity score, a global measure ment scale for dyspepsia, seems to be a valid, reproducible tool but no definition of dyspepsia is given and no distinc tion is made between the different forms of dyspepsia [8]. n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) Normal 254 (63) 169 (58) 75 (63) 807 (25) 359 (23) 630 (28) Gastritis/erosions 0(0) 16 (5) 0(0) 1214 (38) 757 (47) 783 (35) Duodenitis 9 (2) 17 (6) 12 (10) 430 (1 3) 214 (13) 328 (14) Gastric ulcer 17 (4) 17 (6) 4(3) 1 1 9 (4) 55 (3) 35 (2) Duodenal ulcer 34 (9) 25 (8) 15 (13) 474 (1 5 A severity questionnaire of the eight most frequently oc curring and most severe symptoms of dyspepsia has recent ly been validated for research purposes [9].…”

Section: Definition Of Dyspepsiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patients with weight loss, anemia, evidence of gas trointestinal bleeding, obstruction, dysphagia or odynopha gia, immunodeficiency or other systemic illnesses are not considered to be typical patients in the context of the sum mary which follows. Furthermore, patients presenting with isolated heartburn or regurgitation are discussed in a sepa rate article on GERD in this issue of the Journal [10] .…”

Section: Definition Of Dyspepsiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

1. Appropriateness of Gastroscopy: Dyspepsia 1

Froehlich¹,

Bochud²,

Gonvers³

et al. 1999

Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Using the experience gained by previous successful panels dealing with the appropriateness of endoscopy [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23] when treating CD, a new expert panel on the therapy of CD using the RAM will be convened in Switzerland. This chapter describes the methods used for the literature reviews and the systematic approach of the RAM used during the expert panel meeting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EPACT II: Project and Methods

Juillerat

Froehlich²,

Felley³

et al. 2007

Digestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on the first European Panel on the Appropriateness of Crohn’s Disease Treatment (EPACT I) which was held in Lausanne at the beginning of March 2004, a new panel will be convened in Switzerland (EPACT II, November to December 2007) to update this work. A combined evidence- and panel-based method (RAND) will be applied to assess the appropriateness of therapy for Crohn’s disease (CD). In preparation for the meeting of experts, reviews of evidence-based literature were prepared for major clinical presentations of CD. During the meeting, an international multidis- ciplinary panel that includes gastroenterologists, surgeons and general practitioners weigh the strength of evidence and apply their clinical experience when assessing the appropriateness of therapy for 569 specific indications (clinical scenarios). This chapter describes in detail the process of updating the literature review and the systematic approach of the RAND Appropriateness Method used during the expert panel meeting.

show abstract

2. Appropriateness of Gastroscopy: Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease 1

Cited by 11 publications

References 47 publications

Clinical guidelines as decision support for referrals from primary care

Clinical guidelines as decision support for referrals from primary care

1. Appropriateness of Gastroscopy: Dyspepsia 1

EPACT II: Project and Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About