17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Quality indicators in digestive endoscopy: introduction to structure, process, and outcome common indicators Translated title: Indicadores de calidad en endoscopia digestiva: introducción a los indicadores comunes de estructura, proceso y resultado

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The general goal of the project wherein this paper is framed is the proposal of useful quality and safety procedures and indicators to facilitate quality improvement in digestive endoscopy units. This initial offspring sets forth procedures and indicators common to all digestive endoscopy procedures. First, a diagram of pre- and post-digestive endoscopy steps was developed. A group of health care quality and/or endoscopy experts under the auspices of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (Spanish Society of Digestive Diseases) carried out a qualitative review of the literature regarding the search for quality indicators in endoscopic procedures. Then, a paired analysis was used for the selection of literature references and their subsequent review. Twenty indicators were identified, including seven for structure, eleven for process (five pre-procedure, three intra-procedure, three post-procedure), and two for outcome. Quality of evidence was analyzed for each indicator using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification.

          Translated abstract

          El objetivo general del proyecto en el que se inscribe este trabajo es proponer procedimientos e indicadores de calidad y seguridad útiles para facilitar la mejora de la calidad en unidades de Endoscopia Digestiva. En este primer resultado se proponen procedimientos e indicadores comunes a las pruebas de endoscopia digestiva. Primero, se ha diseñado un diagrama de los pasos previos y consecutivos a la realización de la endoscopia digestiva. Un grupo de expertos en calidad asistencial y/o endoscopia, bajo el amparo de la Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, han realizado una revisión cualitativa de la literatura haciendo referencia a la búsqueda de indicadores de calidad en los procedimientos endoscópicos. Posteriormente, por un procedimiento de análisis por pares se ha hecho la selección y análisis de la literatura seleccionada. Se ha identificado un total de 20 indicadores, de los cuales siete son de estructura; once, de proceso (cinco de preprocedimiento, tres de procedimiento y tres de posprocedimiento); y dos, de resultado. Se ha analizado la calidad de la evidencia de cada uno de ellos aplicando la clasificación utilizada en GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

          Related collections

          Most cited references106

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Practice guidelines for sedation and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists.

          (2002)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group

            Background A number of approaches have been used to grade levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations. The use of many different approaches detracts from one of the main reasons for having explicit approaches: to concisely characterise and communicate this information so that it can easily be understood and thereby help people make well-informed decisions. Our objective was to critically appraise six prominent systems for grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations as a basis for agreeing on characteristics of a common, sensible approach to grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations. Methods Six prominent systems for grading levels of evidence and strength of recommendations were selected and someone familiar with each system prepared a description of each of these. Twelve assessors independently evaluated each system based on twelve criteria to assess the sensibility of the different approaches. Systems used by 51 organisations were compared with these six approaches. Results There was poor agreement about the sensibility of the six systems. Only one of the systems was suitable for all four types of questions we considered (effectiveness, harm, diagnosis and prognosis). None of the systems was considered usable for all of the target groups we considered (professionals, patients and policy makers). The raters found low reproducibility of judgements made using all six systems. Systems used by 51 organisations that sponsor clinical practice guidelines included a number of minor variations of the six systems that we critically appraised. Conclusions All of the currently used approaches to grading levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations have important shortcomings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Journal
                diges
                Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas
                Rev. esp. enferm. dig.
                Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                1130-0108
                June 2017
                : 109
                : 6
                : 435-450
                Affiliations
                [05] Madrid orgnameSociedad Española de Patoogía Digestiva (SEPD) orgdiv1Department of Knowledge Management Spain
                [02] Murcia orgnameHospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca orgdiv1Endoscopy Unit. Service of Digestive Diseases Spain
                [04] Murcia orgnameHospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca orgdiv1Service of Digestive Diseases Spain
                [01] Murcia orgnameHospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca orgdiv1Service of Health Care Quality Spain
                [03] Santa Cruz de Tenerife orgnameHospital San Juan de Dios orgdiv1Service of Digestive Diseases Spain
                Article
                S1130-01082017000600007
                10.17235/reed.2017.5035/2017
                365b8f5b-2c5e-4d42-bb39-093b7f880f90

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 03 May 2017
                : 22 May 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 116, Pages: 16
                Product

                SciELO Spain


                Digestive system,Indicadores calidad,Endoscopia,Aparato digestive,Quality indicators,Endoscopy

                Comments

                Comment on this article