For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
37
views
12
references
 Top references
cited by
4
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      62
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Introduction to Starting Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Proper Insertion, Complete Observation, and Appropriate Photographing

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is the most basic of endoscopy procedures and is the technique that trainee doctors first learn. Mastering the basics of endoscopy is very important because when this process is imprecise or performed incorrectly, it can severely affect a patient's health or life. Although there are several guidelines and studies that consider these basics, there are still no standard recommendations for endoscopy in Korea. In this review, basic points, including proper endoscope insertion, precise observation without blind spots, and appropriate photographing, for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy will be discussed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

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

          Minimal standard terminology for gastrointestinal endoscopy - MST 3.0.

          Masayuki Fujino, K Kuznetsov, Thomas Rösch … (2009)
          Standardization of the language of gastrointestinal endoscopy is becoming increasingly important on account of international collaboration, standardized documentation requirements, and computer-based reporting. Version 1 of the Minimal Standard Terminology (MST) was devised to facilitate this development, and, through broad international collaboration, the document was developed and tested further to produce version 2.0, published in 2000. The document forms the basis for computer software by offering standard minimal lists of terms to be used in the structured documentation of endoscopic findings. The ownership of the MST has been transferred to the World Organisation of Digestive Endoscopy (OMED) and in this context, a new revision of the MST document is now in place. Version 3.0 of the terminology includes terms for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and enteroscopy, as well as for adverse event reporting. In addition, acknowledged scoring systems have been included for specific findings, and some structural enhancements have been implemented. The entire document is freely available for noncommercial use from www.omed.org.
          Article 0 comments Cited 26 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy.

            Chris de Graaf, Roger Hollingworth, David Armstrong … (2011)
            Increasing use of gastrointestinal endoscopy, particularly for colorectal cancer screening, and increasing emphasis on health care quality, highlight the need for clearly defined, evidence-based processes to support quality improvement in endoscopy. To identify processes and indicators of quality and safety relevant to high-quality endoscopy service delivery. A multidisciplinary group of 35 voting participants developed recommendation statements and performance indicators. Systematic literature searches generated 50 initial statements that were revised iteratively following a modified Delphi approach using a web-based evaluation and voting tool. Statement development and evidence evaluation followed the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, REsearch and Evaluation) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) guidelines. At the consensus conference, participants voted anonymously on all statements using a 6-point scale. Subsequent web-based voting evaluated recommendations for specific, individual quality indicators, safety indicators and mandatory endoscopy reporting fields. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by 80% of participants. Consensus was reached on 23 recommendation statements addressing the following: ethics (statement 1: agreement 100%), facility standards and policies (statements 2 to 9: 90% to 100%), quality assurance (statements 10 to 13: 94% to 100%), training, education, competency and privileges (statements 14 to 19: 97% to 100%), endoscopy reporting standards (statements 20 and 21: 97% to 100%) and patient perceptions (statements 22 and 23: 100%). Additionally, 18 quality indicators (agreement 83% to 100%), 20 safety indicators (agreement 77% to 100%) and 23 recommended endoscopy-reporting elements (agreement 91% to 100%) were identified. The consensus process identified a clear need for high-quality clinical and outcomes research to support quality improvement in the delivery of endoscopy services. The guidelines support quality improvement in endoscopy by providing explicit recommendations on systematic monitoring, assessment and modification of endoscopy service delivery to yield benefits for all patients affected by the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy.
            Article 0 comments Cited 23 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Minimum staffing requirements for the performance of GI endoscopy.

              Rajeev Jain, Steven Ikenberry, Michelle A. E. Anderson … (2010)
              This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient's condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.
              Article 0 comments Cited 15 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Clin Endosc
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Clin Endosc
                Journal ID (publisher-id): CE
                Title: Clinical Endoscopy
                Publisher: The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
                ISSN (Print): 2234-2400
                ISSN (Electronic): 2234-2443
                Publication date (Print): July 2015
                Publication date (Electronic): 24 July 2015
                Volume: 48
                Issue: 4
                Pages: 279-284
                Affiliations
                Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Kyung Sik Park. Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 56 Dalseong-ro, Jung-gu, Daegu 700-712, Korea. Tel: +82-53-250-7088, Fax: +82-53-250-7442, seenae99@ 123456dsmc.or.kr
                Article
                DOI: 10.5946/ce.2015.48.4.279
                PMC ID: 4522417
                SO-VID: 93645dd9-3ffe-4a61-b5c9-81a0dd2b7bd5
                Copyright © Copyright © 2015 Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
                License:

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Date received : 13 April 2015
                Date revision received : 09 May 2015
                Date accepted : 10 May 2015
                Categories
                Subject: Review

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Radiology & Imaging
                Keywords: upper gastrointestinal endoscopy,insertion,observation,photographing
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Radiology & Imaging
                Keywords: upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, insertion, observation, photographing

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content62

                See all similar

                Cited by4

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors135

                See all reference authors