A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study
Background and Aim: It is essential to develop a novel evaluation system for the quality of individual colonoscopy and provide guidelines on whether and when to follow up the patient after the initial colonoscopy. This study aimed to establish and validate a scoring system for the quality of individ...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 2016-01, Vol.31 (1), p.172-179 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 179 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 172 |
| container_title | Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology |
| container_volume | 31 |
| creator | Zhan, Qiang Xiang, Li Zhao, Xinhua An, Shengli Wang, Yadong Xu, Yangzhi Li, Aimin Gong, Wei Bai, Yang Zhang, Yali Liu, Side |
| description | Background and Aim:
It is essential to develop a novel evaluation system for the quality of individual colonoscopy and provide guidelines on whether and when to follow up the patient after the initial colonoscopy. This study aimed to establish and validate a scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of the adenoma miss rate (AMR).
Methods:
Patients undergoing two consecutive colonoscopies within 90 days between 2009 and 2011 from different levels of hospitals in China were enrolled into this study. Potential risk factors for adenoma miss at the individual colonoscopy in a cohort of patients were evaluated in univariate and multivariate analyses. Corresponding scores for the procedure‐related factors were generated based on their weights, and a scoring system was established and then validated by correlating the system with AMR.
Results:
A total of 2093 patients were enrolled. Procedure‐related factors at the individual colonoscopy (including bowel preparation and imaging methods), doctor experience, retroflexion, and withdrawal time were identified to be independent risk factors, and each of these factors was scored from 0 to 3. Then, a novel scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy (ranging from 0 to 9) was established, which was closely correlated with the AMRs in the establishment (adjusted R2 = 0.845) and validation databases (adjusted R2 = 0.733).
Conclusions:
The developed and validated evaluation system, consisting of procedure‐related independent factors, successfully assesses the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of AMRs. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jgh.13031 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760930256</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1760930256</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3231-a921bc84d1509eee1ee0b6aca55db8a96a2352d7d25fbd046e1c8f2130491f533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kDFP3DAYhi1EBVfaoX-g8kiHgB3HTsJ2Otq7VqgsVEhdLMf-AgYnPmzn2vz7uj1gq5dveZ5X1oPQB0rOaH7nD3f3Z5QRRg_QglYVKWhdiUO0IA3lRctoe4zexvhACKlIzY_QcSkoa0ouFmhc4tHvwOGnSTmbZhy1D3a8w3GOCQbc-4DTPWDYKTepZP2IfY_taOzOmqxg7Z0ffba28wVe4mFyyWoYEwQcIAUft6CT3QGOaTLzO_SmVy7C--d7gn58-Xyz2hRX1-uvq-VVoVnJaKHakna6qQzlpAUACkA6obTi3HSNaoUqGS9NbUred4ZUAqhu-jI3qFrac8ZO0Ol-dxv80wQxycFGDc6pEfwUJa0FaRnJCTL6aY_q_NkYoJfbYAcVZkmJ_JtX5rzyX97MfnyenboBzCv50jMD53vgl3Uw_39JfltvXiaLvWFz79-vhgqPUtSs5vL2-1quxKbdkNuf8pL9AQ0glTM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1760930256</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Zhan, Qiang ; Xiang, Li ; Zhao, Xinhua ; An, Shengli ; Wang, Yadong ; Xu, Yangzhi ; Li, Aimin ; Gong, Wei ; Bai, Yang ; Zhang, Yali ; Liu, Side</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhan, Qiang ; Xiang, Li ; Zhao, Xinhua ; An, Shengli ; Wang, Yadong ; Xu, Yangzhi ; Li, Aimin ; Gong, Wei ; Bai, Yang ; Zhang, Yali ; Liu, Side</creatorcontrib><description>Background and Aim:
It is essential to develop a novel evaluation system for the quality of individual colonoscopy and provide guidelines on whether and when to follow up the patient after the initial colonoscopy. This study aimed to establish and validate a scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of the adenoma miss rate (AMR).
Methods:
Patients undergoing two consecutive colonoscopies within 90 days between 2009 and 2011 from different levels of hospitals in China were enrolled into this study. Potential risk factors for adenoma miss at the individual colonoscopy in a cohort of patients were evaluated in univariate and multivariate analyses. Corresponding scores for the procedure‐related factors were generated based on their weights, and a scoring system was established and then validated by correlating the system with AMR.
Results:
A total of 2093 patients were enrolled. Procedure‐related factors at the individual colonoscopy (including bowel preparation and imaging methods), doctor experience, retroflexion, and withdrawal time were identified to be independent risk factors, and each of these factors was scored from 0 to 3. Then, a novel scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy (ranging from 0 to 9) was established, which was closely correlated with the AMRs in the establishment (adjusted R2 = 0.845) and validation databases (adjusted R2 = 0.733).
Conclusions:
The developed and validated evaluation system, consisting of procedure‐related independent factors, successfully assesses the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of AMRs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0815-9319</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1440-1746</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jgh.13031</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26138256</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Australia: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>adenoma miss ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cohort Studies ; Colonoscopy - methods ; Diagnostic Errors - prevention & control ; Diagnostic Errors - statistics & numerical data ; Female ; Humans ; individual colonoscopy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Multivariate Analysis ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods ; quality evaluation ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2016-01, Vol.31 (1), p.172-179</ispartof><rights>2015 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd</rights><rights>2015 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3231-a921bc84d1509eee1ee0b6aca55db8a96a2352d7d25fbd046e1c8f2130491f533</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjgh.13031$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjgh.13031$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26138256$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhan, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiang, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Xinhua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Shengli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yadong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Yangzhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Aimin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gong, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Side</creatorcontrib><title>A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study</title><title>Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology</title><addtitle>Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology</addtitle><description>Background and Aim:
It is essential to develop a novel evaluation system for the quality of individual colonoscopy and provide guidelines on whether and when to follow up the patient after the initial colonoscopy. This study aimed to establish and validate a scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of the adenoma miss rate (AMR).
Methods:
Patients undergoing two consecutive colonoscopies within 90 days between 2009 and 2011 from different levels of hospitals in China were enrolled into this study. Potential risk factors for adenoma miss at the individual colonoscopy in a cohort of patients were evaluated in univariate and multivariate analyses. Corresponding scores for the procedure‐related factors were generated based on their weights, and a scoring system was established and then validated by correlating the system with AMR.
Results:
A total of 2093 patients were enrolled. Procedure‐related factors at the individual colonoscopy (including bowel preparation and imaging methods), doctor experience, retroflexion, and withdrawal time were identified to be independent risk factors, and each of these factors was scored from 0 to 3. Then, a novel scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy (ranging from 0 to 9) was established, which was closely correlated with the AMRs in the establishment (adjusted R2 = 0.845) and validation databases (adjusted R2 = 0.733).
Conclusions:
The developed and validated evaluation system, consisting of procedure‐related independent factors, successfully assesses the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of AMRs.</description><subject>adenoma miss</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Colonoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Diagnostic Errors - prevention & control</subject><subject>Diagnostic Errors - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>individual colonoscopy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multicenter Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Multivariate Analysis</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods</subject><subject>quality evaluation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0815-9319</issn><issn>1440-1746</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kDFP3DAYhi1EBVfaoX-g8kiHgB3HTsJ2Otq7VqgsVEhdLMf-AgYnPmzn2vz7uj1gq5dveZ5X1oPQB0rOaH7nD3f3Z5QRRg_QglYVKWhdiUO0IA3lRctoe4zexvhACKlIzY_QcSkoa0ouFmhc4tHvwOGnSTmbZhy1D3a8w3GOCQbc-4DTPWDYKTepZP2IfY_taOzOmqxg7Z0ffba28wVe4mFyyWoYEwQcIAUft6CT3QGOaTLzO_SmVy7C--d7gn58-Xyz2hRX1-uvq-VVoVnJaKHakna6qQzlpAUACkA6obTi3HSNaoUqGS9NbUred4ZUAqhu-jI3qFrac8ZO0Ol-dxv80wQxycFGDc6pEfwUJa0FaRnJCTL6aY_q_NkYoJfbYAcVZkmJ_JtX5rzyX97MfnyenboBzCv50jMD53vgl3Uw_39JfltvXiaLvWFz79-vhgqPUtSs5vL2-1quxKbdkNuf8pL9AQ0glTM</recordid><startdate>201601</startdate><enddate>201601</enddate><creator>Zhan, Qiang</creator><creator>Xiang, Li</creator><creator>Zhao, Xinhua</creator><creator>An, Shengli</creator><creator>Wang, Yadong</creator><creator>Xu, Yangzhi</creator><creator>Li, Aimin</creator><creator>Gong, Wei</creator><creator>Bai, Yang</creator><creator>Zhang, Yali</creator><creator>Liu, Side</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201601</creationdate><title>A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study</title><author>Zhan, Qiang ; Xiang, Li ; Zhao, Xinhua ; An, Shengli ; Wang, Yadong ; Xu, Yangzhi ; Li, Aimin ; Gong, Wei ; Bai, Yang ; Zhang, Yali ; Liu, Side</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3231-a921bc84d1509eee1ee0b6aca55db8a96a2352d7d25fbd046e1c8f2130491f533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>adenoma miss</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Colonoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Diagnostic Errors - prevention & control</topic><topic>Diagnostic Errors - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>individual colonoscopy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multicenter Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Multivariate Analysis</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods</topic><topic>quality evaluation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhan, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiang, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Xinhua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>An, Shengli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yadong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Yangzhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Aimin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gong, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bai, Yang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Side</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhan, Qiang</au><au>Xiang, Li</au><au>Zhao, Xinhua</au><au>An, Shengli</au><au>Wang, Yadong</au><au>Xu, Yangzhi</au><au>Li, Aimin</au><au>Gong, Wei</au><au>Bai, Yang</au><au>Zhang, Yali</au><au>Liu, Side</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle><addtitle>Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology</addtitle><date>2016-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>172</spage><epage>179</epage><pages>172-179</pages><issn>0815-9319</issn><eissn>1440-1746</eissn><abstract>Background and Aim:
It is essential to develop a novel evaluation system for the quality of individual colonoscopy and provide guidelines on whether and when to follow up the patient after the initial colonoscopy. This study aimed to establish and validate a scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of the adenoma miss rate (AMR).
Methods:
Patients undergoing two consecutive colonoscopies within 90 days between 2009 and 2011 from different levels of hospitals in China were enrolled into this study. Potential risk factors for adenoma miss at the individual colonoscopy in a cohort of patients were evaluated in univariate and multivariate analyses. Corresponding scores for the procedure‐related factors were generated based on their weights, and a scoring system was established and then validated by correlating the system with AMR.
Results:
A total of 2093 patients were enrolled. Procedure‐related factors at the individual colonoscopy (including bowel preparation and imaging methods), doctor experience, retroflexion, and withdrawal time were identified to be independent risk factors, and each of these factors was scored from 0 to 3. Then, a novel scoring system for the quality of individual colonoscopy (ranging from 0 to 9) was established, which was closely correlated with the AMRs in the establishment (adjusted R2 = 0.845) and validation databases (adjusted R2 = 0.733).
Conclusions:
The developed and validated evaluation system, consisting of procedure‐related independent factors, successfully assesses the quality of individual colonoscopy in terms of AMRs.</abstract><cop>Australia</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>26138256</pmid><doi>10.1111/jgh.13031</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0815-9319 |
| ispartof | Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2016-01, Vol.31 (1), p.172-179 |
| issn | 0815-9319 1440-1746 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760930256 |
| source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
| subjects | adenoma miss Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Cohort Studies Colonoscopy - methods Diagnostic Errors - prevention & control Diagnostic Errors - statistics & numerical data Female Humans individual colonoscopy Male Middle Aged Multicenter Studies as Topic Multivariate Analysis Practice Guidelines as Topic Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods quality evaluation Retrospective Studies Risk Factors Young Adult |
| title | A novel quality scoring system for the evaluation of individual colonoscopy: A multicenter retrospective study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T20%3A20%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20novel%20quality%20scoring%20system%20for%20the%20evaluation%20of%20individual%20colonoscopy:%20A%20multicenter%20retrospective%20study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20gastroenterology%20and%20hepatology&rft.au=Zhan,%20Qiang&rft.date=2016-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=172&rft.epage=179&rft.pages=172-179&rft.issn=0815-9319&rft.eissn=1440-1746&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jgh.13031&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1760930256%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1760930256&rft_id=info:pmid/26138256&rfr_iscdi=true |