Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2012 Jul;76(1):100-6.e1-4.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.019. Epub 2012 Mar 14.

Knowledge of quality performance measures associated with endoscopy among gastroenterology trainees and the impact of a web-based intervention

Jennifer S Thompson  1 , Benjamin Lebwohl, Sapna Syngal, Fay Kastrinos
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Knowledge of quality performance measures associated with endoscopy among gastroenterology trainees and the impact of a web-based intervention

Jennifer S Thompson et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Knowledge of quality measures in endoscopy among trainees is unknown.

Objective: To assess knowledge of endoscopy-related quality indicators among U.S. trainees and determine whether it improves with a Web-based intervention.

Design: Randomized, controlled study.

Setting: Multicenter.

Participants: This study involved trainees identified from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy membership database.

Intervention: Participants were invited to complete an 18-question online test. Respondents were randomized to receive a Web-based tutorial (intervention) or not. The test was readministered 6 weeks after randomization to determine the intervention's impact.

Main outcome measurements: Baseline knowledge of endoscopy-related quality indicators and impact of the tutorial.

Results: A total of 347 of 1220 trainees (28%) completed the test; the mean percentage of correct responses was 55%. For screening colonoscopy, 44% knew the adenoma detection rate benchmark, 42% identified the cecal intubation rate goal, and 74% knew the recommended minimum withdrawal time. A total of 208 of 347 trainees (59%) completed the second test; baseline scores were similar for the tutorial (n = 106) and no tutorial (n = 102) groups (56.4% vs 56.9%, respectively). Scores improved after intervention for the tutorial group (65%, P = .003) but remained unchanged in the no tutorial group. On multivariate analysis, each additional year in training (odds ratio [OR] 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-3.4), training at an academic institution (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.3), and receiving the tutorial (OR 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7-5.9) were associated with scores in the upper tertile.

Limitations: Low response rate.

Conclusion: Knowledge of endoscopy-related quality performance measures is low among trainees but can improve with a Web-based tutorial. Gastroenterology training programs may need to incorporate a formal didactic curriculum to supplement practice-based learning of quality standards in endoscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of participation.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, et al. ASGE/ACG Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:886–91. - PubMed
    1. AGA Task Force on Quality in Practice: A national overview and implications for GI practice. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:361–9. - PubMed
    1. Petersen BT. Demand the Data! Your patients will ask and your practice will need it. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:862–3. - PubMed
    1. Cotton PB, Hawes RH, Barkun A, et al. Excellence in endoscopy: toward practical metrics. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:286–91. - PubMed
    1. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Quality and outcomes assessment in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;52:827–30. - PubMed

Publication types