Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33219988›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology2021

Monitoring photographic proof of cecal intubation: A closed-loop audit of best practice colonoscopy.

Thomas Whitehead-Clarke, Roshan Sothinathan, Ms Anu Sandhya, Divya Sharma, Mohammad Ashraf Raja

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Editorial commentary on the Indian Journal of Gastroenterology January-February 2021.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas Whitehead-ClarkeDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, W1W 7TY, UK. t.whitehead-clarke@nhs.net.ORCID 0000-0003-3126-1409
Roshan SothinathanGeneral Surgery Department, Epsom and St Helier NHS trust, Wrythe Ln, Sutton, Carshalton, SM5 1AA, UK.
Ms Anu SandhyaGeneral Surgery Department, Epsom and St Helier NHS trust, Wrythe Ln, Sutton, Carshalton, SM5 1AA, UK.
Divya SharmaGeneral Surgery Department, Epsom and St Helier NHS trust, Wrythe Ln, Sutton, Carshalton, SM5 1AA, UK.
Mohammad Ashraf RajaGeneral Surgery Department, Epsom and St Helier NHS trust, Wrythe Ln, Sutton, Carshalton, SM5 1AA, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gold standard colonoscopy in the UK demands a 90% cecal intubation (CI) rate. Endoscopists must provide photographic evidence of CI, which can include images of the terminal ileum, appendix orifice, anastomosis or ileocecal valve. Whilst photographic proof of intubation should be obtained for all complete colonoscopies, this is not routinely audited. Three hundred and ninety-six complete colonoscopies were analyzed, 200 in an initial audit, and 196 in a second audit. Photos taken during colonoscopy were reviewed for evidence of successful CI, as well as whether these photographs had been marked as "proof of intubation" (POI). Results were shared at departmental governance meetings in order to assess any improvement in practice. Initial audit revealed 70% of colonoscopies had provided sufficient proof of CI but only 50% provided photographs that were described as such. Twenty percent of colonoscopies provided sufficient images, but these were not identified as POI. Thirty percent of all colonoscopies provided insufficient proof of CI. Upon repeat audit, 71% of colonoscopies met best practice standards, with the remaining 29% showing insufficient evidence of CI. In the modern era of digital technology, lack of photographic evidence should be seen as unacceptable and may raise important clinical and medicolegal concerns. We recommend that audits such as this become standard practice to ensure best practice.

Indexed as

Anatomic LandmarksCecumColonoscopyHumansIntraoperative PeriodIntubation, GastrointestinalMedical AuditPhotographyPractice Guidelines as TopicUnited KingdomBest practice guidelinesColon cancerColonic neoplasmsColonoscopyColon polypsColorectal surgeryGastroenterologyNurse endoscopistSurveillance

Identifiers

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.