Implementation of quality measures in endoscopy: Catch them young!

Pouw, Roos E.

doi:10.1002/ueg2.12055

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in contrast with national databases providing ADR for each endoscopist on a continuous base 13 . This example illustrates the difficulties of a seemingly easy‐to‐implement quality indicator such as ADR in daily clinical practice 2,4,14 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13 This example illustrates the difficulties of a seemingly easy-to-implement quality indicator such as ADR in daily clinical practice. 2,4,14 Another even more challenging-to-implement quality indicator is the adverse event (AE) rate related to gastrointestinal endoscopy. 15,16 In contrast to ADR, which is a quality indicator for colonoscopy, AE registration is a quality indicator common to all gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How to implement adverse events as a quality indicator in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Moreels

2023

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality improvement through the registration of endoscopy‐related adverse events (AEs) has been recognized by major international endoscopy societies as an important quality indicator. The theory behind this is easier to approve than its implementation in daily practice. The results of many valuable attempts have been published in the literature, mainly highlighting the diverse hurdles trying to capture events related to endoscopy and the sedation used for endoscopic procedures. The current review discusses the difficulties encountered attempting to register AEs and incidents related to endoscopic procedures. Government‐driven and financed health‐care databases with automated coupling of specific data seem the only efficient way to implement endoscopy‐related AEs and outcomes on a prospective and complete basis. This will not only allow continuous confidential feedback to endoscopists in relation to the pooled national benchmark data, but also follow‐up in time through data‐driven credentialing aiming to progressively optimize these benchmark data.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to implement adverse events as a quality indicator in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Moreels

2023

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Barriers against Implementation of European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Performance Measures for Colonoscopy in Clinical Practice

Gibiino,

Frazzoni,

Anderloni

et al. 2024

Medicina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The implementation and monitoring of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) performance measures for colonoscopy are suboptimal in clinical practice. Electronic reporting systems may play an important role in data retrieval. We aimed to define the possibility of systematically assessing and monitoring ESGE performance measures for colonoscopy through reporting systems. Materials and Methods: We conducted a survey during a nationwide event on the quality of colonoscopy held in Rome, Italy, in March 2023 by a self-administered questionnaire. Analyses were conducted overall and by workplace setting. Results: The attendance was 93% (M/F 67/26), with equal distribution of age groups, regions and public or private practices. Only about one-third (34%) and 21.5% of participants stated that their reporting system allows them to retrieve all the ESGE performance measures, overall and as automatic retrieval, respectively. Only 66.7% and 10.7% of respondents can systematically report the cecal intubation and the adenoma detection rate, respectively. The analysis according to hospital setting revealed no significant difference for all the items. Conclusions: We found a generalized lack of systematic tracking of performance measures for colonoscopy due to underperforming reporting systems. Our results underline the need to update reporting systems to monitor the quality of endoscopy practice in Italy.

show abstract

Implementation of quality measures in endoscopy: Catch them young!

Cited by 2 publications

References 9 publications

How to implement adverse events as a quality indicator in gastrointestinal endoscopy

How to implement adverse events as a quality indicator in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Barriers against Implementation of European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Performance Measures for Colonoscopy in Clinical Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About