ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Improving Procedural Documentation of Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Single-center Quality Improvement Study.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Large-Volume Paracentesis in a Gastroenterology Ward: A Two-Cycle Quality Improvement Project.Cureus · 2026Article
- Inflammatory bowel disease in paediatrics: Navigating the old challenges and emerging frontiers.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including ulcerative colitis and Crohn disease (CD), presents significant challenges in management, particularly regarding standardized endoscopic scoring. This study aimed to assess and improve procedural documentation practices among endoscopists managing newly diagnosed pediatric IBD (PIBD). Methods: This quality improvement project involved a preintervention review of records for newly diagnosed patients with PIBD from January 2022 to December 2022 and a postintervention review of records from March 2023 to March 2024. We evaluated procedural documentation practices pre- and postintervention using control charts. We conducted an educational session on standardized procedural documentation for endoscopists in March 2023. Standardized procedural documentation was defined as the Mayo endoscopic score for ulcerative colitis and the simple endoscopic score for CD. We displayed a reminder flow diagram on the computer used by endoscopists for their procedural documentation. Results: In the preintervention period (n = 29), endoscopists used standardized documentation in 21% of cases (6/29). Postintervention (n = 43), standardized documentation use increased to 72% (31/43), demonstrating a 51% improvement. Subgroup analysis revealed variable adoption rates, with 100% for IBD-undetermined and 0% for patients with very early onset IBD. Control p-chart revealed a downward trend in the defect rate in the later months, suggesting improved adherence. Conclusions: Our initiative significantly enhanced the utilization of standardized endoscopic documentation among endoscopists for newly diagnosed patients with PIBD. This improvement underscores the effectiveness of structured educational strategies in promoting adherence to best practices. Future efforts should focus on sustaining these gains and addressing subgroup-specific challenges to optimize patient care in IBD management.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.