» Articles » PMID: 24265698

Endoscopic Biopsy As Quality Assurance for Endoscopic Services

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2013 Nov 23
PMID 24265698
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Gastroendoscopy (GS) procedures are not only performed by gastroenterologists (GE) but also by hepatologists (HT) in many countries. Endoscopic biopsy (EBx) remains the gold standard for the investigation and documentation of esophago-gastro-duodenal pathology. EBx is subjectively performed by an endoscopist, and the level of skill and experience of the endoscopist may affect the quality of the endoscopic service. Reasons for this discrepancy included lack of experience practitioners to order EBx when required of GS issues between in GE and HT limit access. Ideally, services should be safe and of high quality. This study assessed the EBx/GS ratio as the endoscopic quality assurance as an index of GS services. This was a cohort study of endoscopists at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, a teaching hospital in southern Taiwan. There were 34,570 episodes of EBx in 199,877 GS procedures. The 25 endoscopists were divided into GE (n = 13) and HT (n = 12) groups, and correlation coefficients were calculated over a 14.5-year duration of intervention. The Trimmean of EBx/GS was 19.29% in 14.5 years (34570/199877 with Trimmean 0.2 percentile ratio correlations), and the Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.90229. There were significantly more EBx procedures in the GE group than in the HT group at 1 and 5 years (21.5% vs. 15.1% and 20.9% vs. 17.3%, respectively, P<0.00001). Junior GE attempted significantly more EBx than both the senior GE (24.06% vs. 20.41%, P<0.0001), and junior HT (24.06% vs. 13.2%, P<0.0001). In conclusion, quality assurance for gastrointestinal endoscopy involves numerous aspects of unit management and patient safety. Quality measures used with the EBx/GS ratio may be one of the best ways to ensure the quality of endoscopic procedures in a teaching hospital.

Citing Articles

Clinical value and influencing factors of establishing stomach cancer organoids by endoscopic biopsy.

Li J, Chen Y, Zhang Y, Peng X, Wu M, Chen L J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2022; 149(7):3803-3810.

PMID: 35987927 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-022-04296-4.


High-level disinfection of gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing.

Chiu K, Lu L, Chiou S World J Exp Med. 2015; 5(1):33-9.

PMID: 25699232 PMC: 4308530. DOI: 10.5493/wjem.v5.i1.33.


Diagnostic pitfall of sebaceous gland metaplasia of the esophagus.

Chiu K, Wu C, Lu L, Eng H, Chiou S World J Clin Cases. 2014; 2(7):311-5.

PMID: 25032211 PMC: 4097163. DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v2.i7.311.

References
1.
Johanson J, Schmitt C, Deas Jr T, Eisen G, Freeman M, Goldstein J . Quality and outcomes assessment in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 52(6 Pt 1):827-830. View

2.
Rex D, Petrini J, Baron T, Chak A, Cohen J, Deal S . Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006; 101(4):873-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00673.x. View

3.
Nakanishi Y, Ochiai A, Shimoda T, Yamaguchi H, Tachimori Y, Kato H . Heterotopic sebaceous glands in the esophagus: histopathological and immunohistochemical study of a resected esophagus. Pathol Int. 1999; 49(4):364-8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1827.1999.00874.x. View

4.
Ko H, Zhang H, Telford J, Enns R . Factors influencing patient satisfaction when undergoing endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 69(4):883-91, quiz 891.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.06.024. View

5.
Fried M, Quigley E, Hunt R, Guyatt G, Anderson B, Bjorkman D . Are global guidelines desirable, feasible and necessary?. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007; 5(1):2-3. DOI: 10.1038/ncpgasthep0994. View