Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22312605›Full record

GuidelineCanadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie2012

Indicators of safety compromise in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Mark Ram Borgaonkar, Lawrence Hookey, Roger Hollingworth, Ernst J Kuipers, Alan Forster, David Armstrong, Alan Barkun, Ron Bridges, Rose Carter, Chris de Gara and 9 more

Abstract readConsensus StatementPractice GuidelineSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Guideline in Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Minor adverse events postcolonoscopy.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2014
    Article
  6. Article
  7. The endoscopy Global Rating Scale-Canada: development and implementation of a quality improvement tool.Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie · 2013
    Article
  8. Pediatric endoscopy: need for a tailored approach to guidelines on quality and safety.Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie · 2012
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Mark Ram BorgaonkarDepartment of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's Newfoundland and Labrador. markb@mun.ca
Lawrence Hookey
Roger Hollingworth
Ernst J Kuipers
Alan Forster
David Armstrong
Alan Barkun
Ron Bridges
Rose Carter
Chris de Gara
Catherine Dube
Robert Enns
Donald Macintosh
Sylviane Forget
Grigorios Leontiadis
Jonathan Meddings
Peter Cotton
Roland Valori
Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Safety and Quality Indicators in Endoscopy Consensus Group

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe importance of quality indicators has become increasingly recognized in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patient safety requires the identification and monitoring of occurrences associated with harm or the potential for harm. The identification of relevant indicators of safety compromise is, therefore, a critical element that is key to the effective implementation of endoscopy quality improvement programs.

objectiveTo identify key indicators of safety compromise in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

methodsThe Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Safety and Quality Indicators in Endoscopy Consensus Group was formed to address issues of quality in endoscopy. A subcommittee was formed to identify key safety indicators. A systematic literature review was undertaken, and articles pertinent to safety in endoscopy were identified and reviewed. All complications and measures used to document safety were recorded. From this, a preliminary list of 16 indicators was compiled and presented to the 35-person consensus group during a three-day meeting. A revised list of 20 items was subsequently put to the consensus group for vote for inclusion on the final list of safety indicators. Items were retained only if the consensus group highly agreed on their importance.

resultsA total of 19 indicators of safety compromise were retained and grouped into the three following categories: medication-related - the need for CPR, use of reversal agents, hypoxia, hypotension, hypertension, sedation doses in patients older than 70 years of age, allergic reactions and laryngospasm⁄bronchospasm; procedure-related early - perforation, immediate postpolypectomy bleeding, need for hospital admission or transfer to emergency department from the gastroenterology unit, instrument impaction, severe persistent abdominal pain requiring evaluation proven to not be perforation; and procedure-related delayed - death within 30 days of procedure, 14-day unplanned hospitalization, 14-day unplanned contact with a health provider, gastrointestinal bleeding within 14 days of procedure, infection or symptomatic metabolic complications.

conclusionsThe 19 indicators of safety compromise in endoscopy, identified by a rigorous, evidence-based consensus process, provide clear outcomes to be recorded by all facilities as part of their continuing quality improvement programs.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyQuality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareCanadaEndoscopy, GastrointestinalHumansQuality Assurance, Health CareRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID22312605
PMCPMC3275408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.