双气囊肠镜检查患者胶囊内镜检查质量报告。

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Joshua Lee, Jonathan Reichstein, Iris Vance, Daniel Wild
{"title":"双气囊肠镜检查患者胶囊内镜检查质量报告。","authors":"Joshua Lee,&nbsp;Jonathan Reichstein,&nbsp;Iris Vance,&nbsp;Daniel Wild","doi":"10.14740/gr1596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abnormal video capsule endoscopy (VCE) findings often require intervention with double balloon enteroscopy (DBE). Accurate VCE reporting is important for procedural planning. In 2017 the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) published a guideline that included recommended elements for VCE reporting. The aim of this study was to examine adherence to the AGA reporting guidelines for VCE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The medical records of all patients who underwent DBE at a tertiary academic center between February 1, 2018, and July 1, 2019, were retrospectively reviewed to identify the VCE report that prompted DBE. Data were collected on the presence of each reporting element recommended by the AGA. Differences in reporting between academic and private practices were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 129 VCE reports were reviewed (84 private practice and 45 academic practice). Reports consistently included indication, date, endoscopist, findings, diagnosis, and management recommendations. Timing of anatomic landmarks and abnormalities were included in only 87.6% of reports and preparation quality in only 26.2%. Reports from private practice groups were significantly more likely to include the type of capsule (P < 0.001). VCE reports from academic centers were more likely to include adverse outcomes (P < 0.001), pertinent negatives (P = 0.0015), extent of exam (P = 0.009), previous investigations (P = 0.045), medications (P < 0.001), and document communication to patient/referring physician (P = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most VCE reports in both private and academic settings included the important elements recommended by the AGA; however only 87% listed the times of landmarks and abnormal findings, which are crucial in determining the type and direction of approach for subsequent interventions. It is unclear whether the quality of VCE reporting influences the outcome of subsequent DBE.</p>","PeriodicalId":12461,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6d/93/gr-16-092.PMC10181337.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of Capsule Endoscopy Reporting in Patients Referred for Double Balloon Enteroscopy.\",\"authors\":\"Joshua Lee,&nbsp;Jonathan Reichstein,&nbsp;Iris Vance,&nbsp;Daniel Wild\",\"doi\":\"10.14740/gr1596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abnormal video capsule endoscopy (VCE) findings often require intervention with double balloon enteroscopy (DBE). Accurate VCE reporting is important for procedural planning. In 2017 the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) published a guideline that included recommended elements for VCE reporting. The aim of this study was to examine adherence to the AGA reporting guidelines for VCE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The medical records of all patients who underwent DBE at a tertiary academic center between February 1, 2018, and July 1, 2019, were retrospectively reviewed to identify the VCE report that prompted DBE. Data were collected on the presence of each reporting element recommended by the AGA. Differences in reporting between academic and private practices were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 129 VCE reports were reviewed (84 private practice and 45 academic practice). Reports consistently included indication, date, endoscopist, findings, diagnosis, and management recommendations. Timing of anatomic landmarks and abnormalities were included in only 87.6% of reports and preparation quality in only 26.2%. Reports from private practice groups were significantly more likely to include the type of capsule (P < 0.001). VCE reports from academic centers were more likely to include adverse outcomes (P < 0.001), pertinent negatives (P = 0.0015), extent of exam (P = 0.009), previous investigations (P = 0.045), medications (P < 0.001), and document communication to patient/referring physician (P = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most VCE reports in both private and academic settings included the important elements recommended by the AGA; however only 87% listed the times of landmarks and abnormal findings, which are crucial in determining the type and direction of approach for subsequent interventions. It is unclear whether the quality of VCE reporting influences the outcome of subsequent DBE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastroenterology Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6d/93/gr-16-092.PMC10181337.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastroenterology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1596\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:视频胶囊内窥镜(VCE)检查结果异常通常需要双气囊内窥镜(DBE)干预。准确的VCE报告对于程序规划非常重要。2017年,美国胃肠病学协会(AGA)发布了一份指南,其中包括VCE报告的推荐元素。本研究的目的是检查对VCE的AGA报告指南的遵守情况。方法:回顾性分析2018年2月1日至2019年7月1日在某高等教育中心接受DBE治疗的所有患者的医疗记录,以确定引发DBE的VCE报告。收集了关于总干事建议的每个报告要素的存在情况的数据。比较了学术和私人执业报告的差异。结果:共审阅VCE报告129份(私人执业84份,学术执业45份)。报告一致包括适应症、日期、内窥镜医师、结果、诊断和管理建议。只有87.6%的报告包括解剖标志和异常的时间,只有26.2%的报告包括准备质量。来自私人诊所组的报告更有可能包括胶囊的类型(P < 0.001)。来自学术中心的VCE报告更可能包括不良结局(P < 0.001)、相关阴性结果(P = 0.0015)、检查范围(P = 0.009)、既往调查(P = 0.045)、药物(P < 0.001)以及与患者/转诊医生的文件沟通(P = 0.001)。结论:在私人和学术环境中,大多数VCE报告都包含了AGA建议的重要元素;然而,只有87%的人列出了里程碑和异常发现的时间,这对于确定后续干预的方法类型和方向至关重要。目前尚不清楚VCE报告的质量是否会影响后续DBE的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Quality of Capsule Endoscopy Reporting in Patients Referred for Double Balloon Enteroscopy.

Quality of Capsule Endoscopy Reporting in Patients Referred for Double Balloon Enteroscopy.

Background: Abnormal video capsule endoscopy (VCE) findings often require intervention with double balloon enteroscopy (DBE). Accurate VCE reporting is important for procedural planning. In 2017 the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) published a guideline that included recommended elements for VCE reporting. The aim of this study was to examine adherence to the AGA reporting guidelines for VCE.

Methods: The medical records of all patients who underwent DBE at a tertiary academic center between February 1, 2018, and July 1, 2019, were retrospectively reviewed to identify the VCE report that prompted DBE. Data were collected on the presence of each reporting element recommended by the AGA. Differences in reporting between academic and private practices were compared.

Results: A total of 129 VCE reports were reviewed (84 private practice and 45 academic practice). Reports consistently included indication, date, endoscopist, findings, diagnosis, and management recommendations. Timing of anatomic landmarks and abnormalities were included in only 87.6% of reports and preparation quality in only 26.2%. Reports from private practice groups were significantly more likely to include the type of capsule (P < 0.001). VCE reports from academic centers were more likely to include adverse outcomes (P < 0.001), pertinent negatives (P = 0.0015), extent of exam (P = 0.009), previous investigations (P = 0.045), medications (P < 0.001), and document communication to patient/referring physician (P = 0.001).

Conclusions: Most VCE reports in both private and academic settings included the important elements recommended by the AGA; however only 87% listed the times of landmarks and abnormal findings, which are crucial in determining the type and direction of approach for subsequent interventions. It is unclear whether the quality of VCE reporting influences the outcome of subsequent DBE.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gastroenterology Research
Gastroenterology Research GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信