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
. 2016 Apr 25;8(8):362-7.
doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i8.362.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound quality assessment on improving endoscopic ultrasound reports and procedures

Ryan Schwab  1 , Eugene Pahk  1 , Jesse Lachter  1
Affiliations

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound quality assessment on improving endoscopic ultrasound reports and procedures

Ryan Schwab et al. World J Gastrointest Endosc. .

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the impact of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) quality assessment on EUS procedures by comparing the most recent 2013-2014 local EUS procedural reports against relevant corresponding data from a 2009 survey of EUS using standardized quality indicators (QIs).

Methods: Per EUS exam, 27 QIs were assessed individually and by grouping pre-, intra-, and post-procedural parameters. The recorded QI frequencies from 200 reports (2013-2014) were compared to corresponding data of 100 reports from the quality control study of EUS in 2009. Data for QIs added after 2009 to professional guidelines (added after 2010) were also tabulated.

Results: Significant differences (P-value < 0.05) were found for 13 of 20 of the relevant QIs examined. 4 of 5 pre-procedural QIs, 6 of 10 intra-procedural QIs, and 3 of 5 post-procedural QIs all demonstrated significant upgrading with a P-value < 0.05.

Conclusion: Significant improvements were demonstrated in QI adherence and thus EUS reporting and delivery quality when the 2013-2014 reports were compared to 2009 results. QI implementation facilitates effective high-quality EUS exams by ensuring comprehensive documentation while limiting error.

Keywords: Endoscopic ultrasound; Fine needle sspiration; Improvement; Quality indicators.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Jacobson BC, Chak A, Hoffman B, Baron TH, Cohen J, Deal SE, Mergener K, Petersen BT, Petrini JL, Safdi MA, et al. Quality indicators for endoscopic ultrasonography. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:898–901. - PubMed
    1. Bluen BE, Lachter J, Khamaysi I, Kamal Y, Malkin L, Keren R, Epelbaum R, Kluger Y. Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies. Diagn Ther Endosc. 2012;2012:139563. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coe SG, Raimondo M, Woodward TA, Gross SA, Gill KR, Jamil LH, Al-Haddad M, Heckman MG, Crook JE, Diehl NN, et al. Quality in EUS: an assessment of baseline compliance and performance improvement by using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-American College of Gastroenterology quality indicators. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:195–201. - PubMed
    1. Lachter J, Bluen B, Waxman I, Bellan W. Establishing a quality indicator format for endoscopic ultrasound. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;5:574–580. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rizk MK, Sawhney MS, Cohen J, Pike IM, Adler DG, Dominitz JA, Lieb JG, Lieberman DA, Park WG, Shaheen NJ, et al. Quality indicators common to all GI endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:3–16. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources