The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Quality Improvement Initiative: developing performance measures

Road map to small bowel endoscopy quality indicators

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Quality indicators for upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are well established and linked to patient outcomes. However, there is a perceived gap in the development and implementation of quality indicators for small bowel endoscopy. In this review, we aimed to discuss the development of quality indicators in small bowel endoscopy and their implementation in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

The proposed quality indicators for small bowel endoscopy focus on process measures, which mainly evaluate the procedural aspects, rather than the outcomes or the overall patient experience. These quality indicators have rarely been studied in clinical practice, leading to a limited understanding of their applicability and impact on patient outcomes and experience.

SUMMARY

Real-world studies evaluating the quality indicators of small bowel endoscopy are warranted to establish an evidence-based framework for their practical application and effectiveness. Linking these indicators to relevant patient outcomes is crucial for their broader acceptance and implementation.

Work-Related Musculoskeletal Injury Rates, Risk Factors, and Ergonomics in Different Endoscopic Specialties: A Review

Endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries (ERIs) are frequent among gastrointestinal, pulmonary, nasal, and urologic endoscopists, impacting the healthcare system. The present review aims to compare the ERI rates, risk factors, and ergonomic recommendations in the different endoscopic fields. A review was conducted using PubMed and Cochrane Library for articles based on surveys and published until 10 January 2024. Demographic, work, and ERI data from 46 publications were included, covering 10,539 responders. The ERI incidence ranged between 14% and 97%, highlighting the need of intervention independent of the specialties. The neck, back, and shoulder were the most frequent ERI locations, while gender, age, years of experience, and procedure volume the most common risk factors. Ergonomic recommendations suggest concentrating on endoscope design changes, especially in gastrointestinal endoscopy, to increase the comfort, adaptability of the equipment in the operating room, and workflow/institutional policy changes. The inclusion of an ergonomic timeout guarantees the correct equipment positioning, the neutralisation of the endoscopist's posture, and an indirect break between procedures. Ergonomic training to increase awareness and best practice should be promoted, also using new technologies. Future research should concentrate on intervention and comparative studies to evaluate to which extent prevention measures and newly designed equipment could reduce ERI incidence.

An estimation of the endoscopist's musculoskeletal injury risk for right and left lateral decubitus positions during colonoscopy: a field-based ergonomic study

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy exposes endoscopists to awkward postures and prolonged forces, which increases their risk of musculoskeletal injury. Patient positioning has a significant impact on the ergonomics of colonoscopy. Recent trials have found the right lateral decubitus position is associated with quicker insertion, higher adenoma detection rates, and greater patient comfort compared to the left lateral decubitus position. However, this patient position is perceived as more strenuous by endoscopists.

METHODS

Nineteen endoscopists were observed performing colonoscopies during a series of four-hour endoscopy clinics. Durations of each patient position (right lateral decubitus, left lateral decubitus, prone, and supine) were recorded for all observed procedures (n = 64). Endoscopist injury risk was estimated by a trained researcher for the first and last colonoscopies of the shifts (n = 34) using Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA), an observational ergonomic tool that estimates risk of musculoskeletal injury by scoring postures of the upper body and factors such as muscle use, force, and load. The total RULA scores were compared with a Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test for patient position (right and left lateral decubitus) and time (first and last procedures) with significance taken at p < 0.05. Endoscopist preferences were also surveyed.

RESULTS

The right lateral decubitus position was associated with significantly higher RULA scores than the left lateral decubitus position (median 5 vs. 3, p < 0.001). RULA scores were not significantly different between the first and last procedures of the shifts (median 5 vs. 5, p = 0.816). 89% of endoscopists preferred the left lateral decubitus position, primarily due to superior ergonomics and comfort.

CONCLUSION

RULA scores indicate an increased risk of musculoskeletal injury in both patient positions, with greater risk in the right lateral decubitus position.

Effects of single-use alfentanil versus propofol on cognitive functions after colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trial

Purpose

Colonoscopy is often accompanied by short-term postoperative cognitive decline. We aimed to explore whether single-use alfentanil for patients undergoing elective colonoscopy could reduce cognitive impairment at discharge compared with propofol.

Patients and methods

172 adult patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized to receive intravenous propofol at 2 mg/kg (group P) or alfentanil at 10 μg/kg (group A); 40 healthy volunteers were included in the blank group. Cognitive function was considered the primary outcome and was measured using five neuropsychological tests before sedation and discharge. The z-score method was used to determine cognitive dysfunction according to z-score >1.96 in two types of neuropsychological tests. Other outcomes included discharge time, vital signs, associated adverse events during colonoscopy, and the satisfaction level of patients and endoscopic physicians.

Results

164 patients (78 in group A and 86 in group P) completed the study protocol. At discharge, the incidence of cognitive dysfunction in group P was 23% and was significantly lower in the alfentanil group (2.5%), with a relative risk of 0.11 (95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.46, P < 0.001). The incidence of hypotension in group A was lower than that in group P (3.8% vs 22.1%, relative risk = 0.17 [95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.46, P = 0.001]), and the discharge time in group A was shorter than that in group P (5 [(Rutter and et al., 2016; Zhang and et al., 2013; Hirsh and et al., 2006; Zhou and et al., 2021; Singh and et al., 2008; Ko and et al., 2010; Sargin et al., 2019) 3-93-9 vs 13 [(Ekmekci and et al., 2017; Eberl and et al., 2012; Eberl and et al., 2014; N'Kaoua and et al., 2002; Chung et al., 1995; Berger and et al., 2019; Quan and et al., 2019; Deng and et al., 2021; Gualtieri and Johnson, 2006) 10-1810-18 min, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

For patients undergoing colonoscopy, single-use alfentanil causes less damage to postoperative cognitive function, less risk of hypotension, and shorter discharge time than propofol.

Explainable artificial intelligence incorporated with domain knowledge diagnosing early gastric neoplasms under white light endoscopy

White light endoscopy is the most pivotal tool for detecting early gastric neoplasms. Previous artificial intelligence (AI) systems were primarily unexplainable, affecting their clinical credibility and acceptability. We aimed to develop an explainable AI named ENDOANGEL-ED (explainable diagnosis) to solve this problem. A total of 4482 images and 296 videos with focal lesions from 3279 patients from eight hospitals were used for training, validating, and testing ENDOANGEL-ED. A traditional sole deep learning (DL) model was trained using the same dataset. The performance of ENDOANGEL-ED and sole DL was evaluated on six levels: internal and external images, internal and external videos, consecutive videos, and man-machine comparison with 77 endoscopists in videos. Furthermore, a multi-reader, multi-case study was conducted to evaluate the ENDOANGEL-ED's effectiveness. A scale was used to compare the overall acceptance of endoscopists to traditional and explainable AI systems. The ENDOANGEL-ED showed high performance in the image and video tests. In man-machine comparison, the accuracy of ENDOANGEL-ED was significantly higher than that of all endoscopists in internal (81.10% vs. 70.61%, p < 0.001) and external videos (88.24% vs. 78.49%, p < 0.001). With ENDOANGEL-ED's assistance, the accuracy of endoscopists significantly improved (70.61% vs. 79.63%, p < 0.001). Compared with the traditional AI, the explainable AI increased the endoscopists' trust and acceptance (4.42 vs. 3.74, p < 0.001; 4.52 vs. 4.00, p < 0.001). In conclusion, we developed a real-time explainable AI that showed high performance, higher clinical credibility, and acceptance than traditional DL models and greatly improved the diagnostic ability of endoscopists.

A system based on deep convolutional neural network improves the detection of early gastric cancer

Background

Early gastric cancer (EGC) has a high survival rate, but it is difficult to diagnosis. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) based on deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) has made significant progress in the field of gastroenterology. The purpose of this study was to establish a DCNN assist system to improve the detection of EGC.

Methods

3400 EGC and 8600 benign images were collected to train the DCNN to detect EGC. Subsequently, its diagnostic ability was compared to that of endoscopists using an independent internal test set (ITS, including 1289 images) and an external test set (ETS, including 542 images) come from three digestive center.

Results

The diagnostic time of DCNN and endoscopists were 0.028s, 8.05 ± 0.21s, 7.69 ± 0.25s in ITS, and 0.028s, 7.98 ± 0.19s, 7.50 ± 0.23s in ETS, respectively. In ITS, the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy of DCNN are 88.08%(95% confidence interval,95%CI,85.24%-90.44%), 88.60% (95%CI,86.74%-90.22%), respectively. In ETS, the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy are 92.08% (95%CI, 87.91%- 94.94%),92.07%(95%CI, 89.46%-94.08%),respectively. DCNN outperformed all endoscopists in ETS, and had a significantly higher sensitivity than the junior endoscopists(JE)(by18.54% (95%CI, 15.64%-21.84%) in ITS, also higher than JE (by21.67%,95%CI, 16.90%-27.32%) and senior endoscopists (SE) (by2.08%, 95%CI, 0.75%-4.92%)in ETS. The accuracy of DCNN model was higher (by10.47%,95%CI, 8.91%-12.27%) than that of JE in ITS, and also higher (by14.58%,95%CI, 11.84%-17.81%; by 1.94%,95%CI,1.25%-2.96%, respectively) than JE and SE in ETS.

Conclusion

The DCNN can detected more EGC images in a shorter time than the endoscopists. It will become an effective tool to assist in the detection of EGC in the near future.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) quality standards and indicators for pediatric endoscopy: an ASGE-endorsed guideline

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current endoscopy quality guidelines largely focus on cancer screening-related metrics that are not applicable to pediatric populations. Through an international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN), quality standards and indicators for pediatric endoscopic procedures were developed and endorsed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE).

METHODS

The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II instrument guided PEnQuIN members, from 31 centers representing 11 countries, in generating and refining proposed quality standards and indicators. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Consensus on reporting elements was sought with an iterative online Delphi process.

RESULTS

Forty-nine quality standards and 47 indicators, encompassing pediatric endoscopy facilities, procedures, and endoscopists, as well as 30 reporting elements essential for inclusion within a pediatric endoscopy report reached consensus. Minimal acceptable standards were defined for 3 key indicators related to pediatric lower endoscopy: terminal ileal intubation rate ≥85%, cecal intubation rate ≥90%, and rate of adequate bowel preparation ≥80%. There was strong consensus that terminal ileal intubation, rather than cecal intubation, is integral to ensuring high-quality endoscopic care in children.

CONCLUSIONS

The PEnQuIN guidelines establish international agreement on clinically meaningful metrics tailored to pediatric endoscopy that can be used to promote safe, high-quality, patient- and family-centered endoscopic care. Moving forward, it is recommended that all providers and facilities involved in endoscopy service for children adopt the PEnQuIN standards, indicators, and key reporting elements outlined in these ASGE-endorsed guidelines.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopic Procedures: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline

INTRODUCTION

High-quality pediatric gastrointestinal procedures are performed when clinically indicated and defined by their successful performance by skilled providers in a safe, comfortable, child-oriented, and expeditious manner. The process of pediatric endoscopy begins when a plan to perform the procedure is first made and ends when all appropriate patient follow-up has occurred. Procedure-related standards and indicators developed to date for endoscopy in adults emphasize cancer screening and are thus unsuitable for pediatric medicine.

METHODS

With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of endoscopic procedures. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process and finalized at an in-person conference. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 14 standards for pediatric endoscopic procedures, as well as 30 indicators that can be used to identify high-quality procedures. These were subcategorized into three subdomains: Preprocedural (3 standards, 7 indicators), Intraprocedural (8 standards, 18 indicators), and Postprocedural (3 standards, 5 indicators). A minimum target for the key indicator, "rate of adequate bowel preparation," was set at ≥80%.

DISCUSSION

It is recommended that all facilities and individual providers performing pediatric endoscopy worldwide initiate and engage with the procedure-related standards and indicators developed by PEnQuIN to identify gaps in quality and drive improvement.

Overview of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopy: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric-specific quality standards for endoscopy are needed to define best practices, while measurement of associated indicators is critical to guide quality improvement. The international Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) working group was assembled to develop and define quality standards and indicators for pediatric gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures through a rigorous guideline consensus process.

METHODS

The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument guided PEnQuIN members, recruited from 31 centers of various practice types representing 11 countries, in generating and refining proposed quality standards and indicators. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process, and finalized at an in-person conference. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

Forty-nine quality standards and 47 indicators reached consensus, encompassing pediatric endoscopy facilities, procedures, endoscopists, and the patient experience. The evidence base for PEnQuIN standards and indicators was largely adult-based and observational, and downgraded for indirectness, imprecision, and study limitations to "very low" quality, resulting in "conditional" recommendations for most standards (45/49).

CONCLUSIONS

The PEnQuIN guideline development process establishes international agreement on clinically meaningful metrics that can be used to promote safety and quality in endoscopic care for children. Through PEnQuIN, pediatric endoscopists and endoscopy services now have a framework for auditing, providing feedback, and ultimately, benchmarking performance. Expansion of evidence and prospective validation of PEnQuIN standards and indicators as predictors of clinically relevant outcomes and high-quality pediatric endoscopic care is now a research priority.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopists and Endoscopists in Training: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline

INTRODUCTION

High-quality pediatric endoscopy requires reliable performance of procedures by competent individual providers who consistently uphold all standards determined to assure optimal patient outcomes. Establishing consensus expectations for ongoing monitoring and assessment of individual pediatric endoscopists is a method for confirming the highest possible quality of care for such procedures worldwide. We aim to provide guidance to define and measure quality of endoscopic care for children.

METHODS

With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of endoscopists. Consensus was sought via an iterative online Delphi process and finalized at an in-person conference. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 6 standards that all providers who perform pediatric endoscopy should uphold and 2 standards for pediatric endoscopists in training, with 7 corresponding indicators that can be used to identify high-quality endoscopists. Additionally, these can inform continuous quality improvement at the provider level. Minimum targets for defining high-quality pediatric ileocolonoscopy were set for 2 key indicators: cecal intubation rate (≥90%) and terminal ileal intubation rate (≥85%).

DISCUSSION

It is recommended that all individual providers performing or training to perform pediatric endoscopy initiate and engage with these international endoscopist-related standards and indicators developed by PEnQuIN.

Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network Quality Standards and Indicators for Pediatric Endoscopy Facilities: A Joint NASPGHAN/ESPGHAN Guideline

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing international recognition of the impact of variability in endoscopy facilities on procedural quality and outcomes. There is also growing precedent for assessing the quality of endoscopy facilities at regional and national levels by using standardized rating scales to identify opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

With support from the North American and European Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN), an international working group of the Pediatric Endoscopy Quality Improvement Network (PEnQuIN) used the methodological strategy of the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to develop standards and indicators relevant for assessing the quality of facilities where endoscopic care is provided to children. Consensus was reached via an iterative online Delphi process and subsequent in-person meeting. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

The PEnQuIN working group achieved consensus on 27 standards for facilities supporting pediatric endoscopy, as well 10 indicators that can be used to identify high-quality endoscopic care in children. These standards were subcategorized into three subdomains: Quality of Clinical Operations (15 standards, 5 indicators); Patient and Caregiver Experience (9 standards, 5 indicators); and Workforce (3 standards).

DISCUSSION

The rigorous PEnQuIN process successfully yielded standards and indicators that can be used to universally guide and measure high-quality facilities for procedures around the world where endoscopy is performed in children. It also underscores the current paucity of evidence for pediatric endoscopic care processes, and the need for research into this clinical area.

One- or two-operator techniques for oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy in unsedated patients: A comparative prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

The standard oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy procedure is performed with a single endoscopist (SE). Nurse-assisted (NA) oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopies have not yet been studied. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of an NA endoscopy compared to an SE endoscopy.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, randomized trial, in which 500 adult patients were divided into two groups. In the first group, patients underwent an endoscopy with an SE. In the second group, the endoscopy was performed with an NA. The ease of the procedure (scores 1-4; 1 difficult, 2 satisfactory, 3 easy, 4 veryeasy), evaluation of patient satisfaction (scores 1-4; 1 uncomfortable, 2 satisfactory, 3 comfortable, 4 verycomfortable), total time of the procedure and vocal cord observation were determined as quality indicators.

RESULTS

Mean patient satisfaction scores in groups 1 and 2 were 2.98±0.79 and 3.11±0.78, respectively (p=0.043), with uncomfortable ratings in 5.2% vs 4%, satisfactory in 16.8% vs 13.2%, comfortable in 53.2% vs 50.4%, and very comfortable in 24.8% vs 32.4% of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Retching rates during the procedure were 54.4% and 45.2% (p=0.040) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. No differences were seen in vocal cord observation (54.4% vs 56.0%), total procedure time (2.35±1.56 vs 2.41±1.48min) and easy score (3.26±0.603 vs 3.25±0.64) in groups 1 and 2 for the procedures. Very easy, easy, satisfactory, and difficult ratings were given by 33.6% vs 34.8%, 60.4% vs 56.4%, 4.8% vs 7.6% and 1.2% vs 1.2% of groups 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the conventional method, the assisted endoscopic technique provides more comfort and less gag reflex without increasing the processing time or difficulty of performing the procedure.

Evaluation of polypectomy quality indicators of large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps in a nonexpert, bowel cancer screening cohort

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With the introduction of the national bowel cancer screening program, the detection of sessile and flat colonic lesions ≥20 mm in size, defined as large nonpedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), has increased. The aim of this study was to examine the quality of endoscopic treatment of LNPCPs in the Dutch screening program.

METHODS

This investigation comprised 2 related, but separate, substudies (1 with a cross-sectional design and 1 with a longitudinal design). The first examined prevalence and characteristics of LNPCPs in data from the national Dutch screening cohort from February 2014 until January 2017. The second, with screening data from 5 endoscopy units in the Southern part of the Netherlands from February 2014 until August 2015, examined performance on important quality indicators (technical and clinical successes, recurrence rate, adverse event rate, and surgery referral rate). All patients were part of the national Dutch screening cohort.

RESULTS

In the national cohort, an LNPCP was detected in 8% of participants. Technical and clinical success decreased with increasing LNPCP size, from 93% and 96% in 20- to 29-mm lesions to 85% and 86% in 30- to 39-mm lesions and to 74% and 81% in ≥40-mm lesions (P < .001; P = .034). The cumulative recurrence rate at 12 months increased with LNPCP size, from 9% to 22% and 26% in the respective size groups (P = .095). The adverse event rate was 5%. The overall surgical referral rate for noninvasive LNPCPs was 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this performance of 2 substudies, it was shown that quality parameters for endoscopic resection of large polyps in the Dutch screening cohort are not reached, especially in ≥30-mm polyps. Endoscopic resection of large polyps could benefit from additional training, quality monitoring, and centralization either within or between centers.

Application of convolutional neural network in detecting and classifying gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common cancer in the world, and at present, esophagogastroduodenoscopy is recognized as an acceptable method for the screening and monitoring of GC. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are a type of deep learning model and have been widely used for image analysis. This paper reviews the application and prospects of CNNs in detecting and classifying GC, aiming to introduce a computer-aided diagnosis system and to provide evidence for subsequent studies.

Dutch Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Audit: automated extraction of colonoscopy data for quality assessment and improvement

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The importance of having quality assessment, assurance, and improvement tools in health care is increasingly recognized. However, the additional associated administration burden progressively interferes with the structural implementation and adoption of such tools, especially when it concerns high-volume procedures such as colonoscopies. The development of the Dutch Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Audit (DGEA), a registry with automated extraction of colonoscopy quality data, and its first results are described.

METHODS

In close cooperation with commercial endoscopy reporting systems and a national histopathology database, healthcare professionals performing colonoscopies initiated a quality registry that extracts data from its core hospital resource or histology database without manual interference of the healthcare providers. Data extracted consisted of patient age, gender, indication of the colonoscopy, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Boston Bowel Preparation Score, and cecal intubation; for the colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test in the colorectal cancer screening program, other data were polyp detection rate, which was available for all 48 hospitals or endoscopy centers, and adenoma detection rate, which was available for 26 hospitals or endoscopy centers.

RESULTS

Between January 1, 2016 and March 31, 2019, 48 hospitals or endoscopy centers voluntarily participated in the DGEA, and 275,017 unique patients with 313,511 colonoscopies were registered. Overall missing values were limited to <1%.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrate that it is feasible to deploy a quality registry collecting uniform data without additional administration burden for healthcare professionals.

Prevalence, risk factors and global impact of musculoskeletal injuries among endoscopists: a nationwide European study

Background and study aims  Previous studies have suggested a high prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries (MI) in endoscopists. Little evidence has come from European countries. Our main aim was to evaluate the prevalence, type, and impact of MI among Portuguese endoscopists. We also sought to identify risk factors for the development, severity and number of endoscopy-related MI. Material and methods  A 48-question electronic survey was developed by a multidisciplinary group. The electronic survey was sent to all members of Portuguese Society of Gastroenterology (n = 705) during May 2019. Study data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at SPG - CEREGA. Results  The survey was completed by 171 endoscopists (response rate of 24.3 %), 55.0 % female with a median age of 36 years (range 26-78). The prevalence of at least one MI related to endoscopy was 69.6 % (n = 119), the most frequent being neck pain (30.4 %) and thumb pain (29.2 %). The median time for MI development was 6 years (range 2 months-30 years). Severe pain was reported by 19.3 %. Change in endoscopic technique was undertaken by 61.3 % and reduction in endoscopic caseload was undertaken by 22.7 %. Missing work was reported by 10.1 %, with the median time off from work being 30 days (range 1-90). Female gender and ≥ 15 years in practice were independently associated with MI and severe pain. Years in practice, weekly-time performing endoscopy, and gender were significant predictors of the number of MI. Conclusions  Prevalence of MI was significant among Portuguese endoscopists and had a relevant impact on regular and professional activities.

Updates on the Facilities, Procedures, and Performance of the Accredited Endoscopy Unit

Endoscopic quality indicators can be classified into three categories, namely facilities and equipment, endoscopic procedures, and outcome measures. In 2019, the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy updated the accreditation of qualified endoscopy unit assessment items for these quality indicators to establish competence and define areas of continuous quality improvement.

Here, we presented the updated program guidelines on the facilities, procedures, and performance of the accredited endoscopy unit. Many of these items have not yet been validated. However, the updated program will help in establishing competence and defining areas of continuous quality improvement in Korean endoscopic practice.

Development of a national automated endoscopy database: The United Kingdom National Endoscopy Database (NED)

Background

The National Endoscopy Database (NED) project commenced in 2013 under the auspices of the Joint Advisory Group. The aim is to upload endoscopy procedure data from all units across the United Kingdom to a centralised database. The database can be used to facilitate quality assurance, research and training in endoscopy.

Objective

This article describes the development and implementation process of NED from its inception to date.

Methods

NED utilises automated data uploading of a minimum dataset from local endoscopy reporting systems to a central national database via the internet. Currently all data are anonymised. Key performance indicators are presented to endoscopists and organisations on a web-based platform for quality assurance purposes.

Results

As of October 2018, 295 endoscopy services out of a total of 529 known services in the UK (56%) are actively uploading to NED. Data from more than 400,000 endoscopic procedures have been uploaded.

Conclusion

UK-wide data collection from endoscopy units to a central database is feasible using an automated upload system. This has the potential to facilitate endoscopy quality assurance and research.

Establishing a model to measure and predict the quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Tens of millions of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are performed every year in China, but the quality varies significantly and related factors are complex. Individual endoscopist- and endoscopy division-related factors may be useful to establish a model to measure and predict the quality of endoscopy.

AIM

To establish a model to measure and predict the quality of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in mainland China.

METHODS

Selected data on endoscopy experience, equipment, facility, qualification of endoscopists, and other relevant variables were collected from the National Database of Digestive Endoscopy of China. The multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the potential predictive variables for occurrence of medical malpractice and patient disturbance. Linear and nonlinear regressions were used to establish models to predict incidence of endoscopic complications.

RESULTS

In 2012, gastroscopy/colonoscopy-related complications in mainland China included bleeding in 4,359 cases (0.02%) and perforation in 914 (0.003%). Endoscopic-retrograde-cholangiopancreatography-related complications included severe acute pancreatitis in 593 cases (0.3%), bleeding in 2,151 (1.10%), perforation in 257 (0.13%) and biliary infection in 4,125 (2.11%). Moreover, 1,313 (5.0%) endoscopists encountered with medical malpractice, and 5,243 (20.0%) encountered with the disturbance from patients. The length of endoscopy experience, weekly working hours, weekly night shifts, annual vacation days and job satisfaction were predictors for the occurrence of medical malpractice and patient disturbance. However, the length of endoscopy experience and the ratio of endoscopists to nurses were not adequate to establish an effective predictive model for endoscopy complications.

CONCLUSION

The workload and job satisfaction of endoscopists are valuable predictors for medical malpractice or patient disturbance. More comprehensive data are needed to establish quality-predictive models for endoscopic complications.

The 2018 ISDE achalasia guidelines

Achalasia is a relatively rare primary motor esophageal disorder, characterized by absence of relaxations of the lower esophageal sphincter and of peristalsis along the esophageal body. As a result, patients typically present with dysphagia, regurgitation and occasionally chest pain, pulmonary complication and malnutrition. New diagnostic methodologies and therapeutic techniques have been recently added to the armamentarium for treating achalasia. With the aim to offer clinicians and patients an up-to-date framework for making informed decisions on the management of this disease, the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus Guidelines proposed and endorsed the Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines (I-GOAL). The guidelines were prepared according the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-REX) tool, accredited for guideline production by NICE UK. A systematic literature search was performed and the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations were graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Given the relative rarity of this disease and the paucity of high-level evidence in the literature, this process was integrated with a three-step process of anonymous voting on each statement (DELPHI). Only statements with an approval rate >80% were accepted in the guidelines. Fifty-one experts from 11 countries and 3 representatives from patient support associations participated to the preparations of the guidelines. These guidelines deal specifically with the following achalasia issues: Diagnostic workup, Definition of the disease, Severity of presentation, Medical treatment, Botulinum Toxin injection, Pneumatic dilatation, POEM, Other endoscopic treatments, Laparoscopic myotomy, Definition of recurrence, Follow up and risk of cancer, Management of end stage achalasia, Treatment options for failure, Achalasia in children, Achalasia secondary to Chagas' disease.

Musculoskeletal injuries in gastrointestinal endoscopists: a systematic review

Gastrointestinal(GI) endoscopy forms a significant proportion of clinicians' workloads. However, little attention is given to the ergonomic aspects of endoscopy. This systematic review of musculoskeletal pain and/or injuries in GI endoscopists aims to better understand the types of occupational injuries resulting from endoscopic procedures and associated risk factors. Areas covered: Systematic literature search conducted for articles evaluating prevalence, risk factors and mechanism of musculoskeletal pain and/or injuries related to GI endoscopy. In 13 included studies, 39-89% of surveyed endoscopists reported pain and/or injuries related to endoscopy. Common areas of pain were the back(15-57%), neck(9-46%), shoulders(9-19%), elbows(8-15%) and hands/fingers(14-82%). Risk factors included procedure volume, time spent doing endoscopy, cumulative time in practice and endoscopist age. Experimental studies showed that forces and loads placed on endoscopists' bodies during procedures place them at risk of occupational injury. Areas of pain differed between novice and experienced endoscopists implying separate mechanisms of injury. Expert commentary: Comprehensive investigation into the prevalence, types, pathophysiology and methods to minimise endoscopy-related musculoskeletal injuries is vital to ensure the continued efficient provision of endoscopy services in the face of rising demands worldwide. A paradigm shift is required in endoscopic devices and techniques to improve safety and comfort.

Quality in Colonoscopy: Beyond the Adenoma Detection Rate Fever

Background

Colonoscopy quality is a hot topic in gastroenterological communities, with several actual guidelines focusing on this aspect. Although the adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the single most important indicator, several other metrics are described and need reporting. Electronic medical reports are essential for the audit of quality indicators; nevertheless, they have proved not to be faultless.

Aim

The aim of this study was to analyse and audit quality indicators (apart from ADR) using only our internal electronic endoscopy records as a starting point for improvement.

Methods

An analysis of electronically recorded information of 8,851 total colonoscopies from a single tertiary centre from 2010 to 2015 was performed.

Results

The mean patient age was 63.4 ± 8.5 years; 45.5% of them were female, and in 14.6% sedation was used. Photographic documentation was done in 98.4% with 10.7 photographs on average, and 37.4% reports had <8 pictures per exam. Bowel preparation was rated as adequate in 67%, fair in 27% and inadequate in 4.9% of cases. The adjusted caecal intubation rate (CIR) was 92%, while negative predictors were inadequate preparation (OR 119, 95% CI 84-170), no sedation (OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.81-3.15), female gender (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.38-1.88) and age ≥65 years (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.34-1.82). In 28% of patients, a snare polypectomy was performed, correlating with adequate preparation (OR 5.75, 95% CI 3.90-8.48), male gender (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.64-2.01) and age ≥65 years (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13-1.37; p < 0.01) as positive predictors. An annual evolution was observed with improvements in photographic documentation (10.7 vs. 12.9; p < 0.001), CIR (91 vs. 94%; p = 0.002) and "adequate" bowel preparation (p = 0.004). Conclusions: There is much more to report than the ADR to ensure quality in colonoscopy practice. Better registry systematization and integrated software should be goals to achieve in the short term.

How to Improve the Quality of Screening Endoscopy in Korea: National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program

In Korea, gastric cancer screening, either esophagogastroduodenoscopy or upper gastrointestinal series (UGIS), is performed biennially for adults aged 40 years or older. Screening endoscopy has been shown to be associated with localized cancer detection and better than UGIS. However, the diagnostic sensitivity of detecting cancer is not satisfactory. The National Endoscopy Quality Improvement (QI) program was initiated in 2009 to enhance the quality of medical institutions and improve the effectiveness of the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP). The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy developed quality standards through a broad systematic review of other endoscopic quality guidelines and discussions with experts. The standards comprise five domains: qualifications of endoscopists, endoscopic unit facilities and equipment, endoscopic procedure, endoscopy outcomes, and endoscopic reprocessing. After 5 years of the QI program, feedback surveys showed that the perception of QI and endoscopic practice improved substantially in all domains of quality, but the quality standards need to be revised. How to avoid missing cancer in endoscopic procedures in daily practice was reviewed, which can be applied to the mass screening endoscopy. To improve the quality and effectiveness of NCSP, key performance indicators, acceptable quality standards, regular audit, and appropriate reimbursement are necessary.