Your browser doesn't support javascript.


Atenção Primária à Saúde

Home > Pesquisa > ()
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportação:


Adicionar mais destinatários
| |

A wide variation of the quality of colonoscopy reporting system in the real clinical practice in southeastern area of Korea.

Lee, Jung Min; Kang, Yu Jin; Kim, Eun Soo; Lee, Yoo Jin; Park, Kyung Sik; Cho, Kwang Bum; Jeon, Seong Woo; Jung, Min Kyu; Lee, Hyun Seok; Kim, Eun Young; Jung, Jin Tae; Jang, Byung Ik; Kim, Kyeong Ok; Chung, Yun Jin; Yang, Chang Hun.
Intest Res; 14(4): 351-357, 2016 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | Nov 2016 | ID: mdl-27799886
Resumo: BACKGROUND/AIMS: Establishment of a colonoscopy reporting system is a prerequisite to determining and improving quality. This study aimed to investigate colonoscopists' opinions and the actual situation of a colonoscopy reporting system in a clinical practice in southeastern area of Korea and to assess the factors predictive of an inadequate reporting system. METHODS: Physicians who performed colonoscopies in the Daegu-Gyeongbuk province of Korea and were registered with the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) were interviewed via mail about colonoscopy reporting systems using a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 181 endoscopists invited to participate, 125 responded to the questionnaires (response rate, 69%). Most responders were internists (105/125, 84%) and worked in primary clinics (88/125, 70.4%). Seventy-one specialists (56.8%) held board certifications for endoscopy from the KSGE. A median of 20 colonoscopies (interquartile range, 10-47) was performed per month. Although 88.8% of responders agreed that a colonoscopy reporting system is necessary, only 18.4% (23/125) had achieved the optimal reporting system level recommended by the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. One-third of endoscopists replied that they did not use a reporting document for the main reasons of "too busy" and "inconvenience." Non-endoscopy specialists and primary care centers were independent predictive factors for failure to use a colonoscopy reporting system. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of colonoscopy reporting systems varies widely and is considerably suboptimal in actual clinical practice settings in southeastern Korea, indicating considerable room for quality improvements in this field.