Optimising the indications for biliary stent placement during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a quality improvement initiative to enhance patient care and reduce healthcare resource utilisation.

IF 3.3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY BMJ Open Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1136/bmjgast-2024-001375
Suliman Alhaidari, Ibrahim Alzahrani, Manar Alhanaee, Alan Decanini, Mahmod Mohamed, Sergio Zepeda-Gomez, Pamela Mathura, Julie Zhang, Gurpal Sandha
{"title":"Optimising the indications for biliary stent placement during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a quality improvement initiative to enhance patient care and reduce healthcare resource utilisation.","authors":"Suliman Alhaidari, Ibrahim Alzahrani, Manar Alhanaee, Alan Decanini, Mahmod Mohamed, Sergio Zepeda-Gomez, Pamela Mathura, Julie Zhang, Gurpal Sandha","doi":"10.1136/bmjgast-2024-001375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A retrospective chart audit was performed to review biliary stent utilisation from January 2020 to January 2021. Non-guideline-based stent insertion was identified in 16% of patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones presenting for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). To improve this knowledge-practice gap, a quality improvement (QI) intervention was devised and trialled.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To synchronise clinical indications for biliary stent insertion in patients with CBD stones in accordance with published guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a QI pre-post study design, chart audits were completed and shared with the ERCP team (n=6). Indication for biliary stent insertion was compared to published guidelines assessed by two reviewers independently (<i>kappa</i> statistic calculated). The QI intervention included an education session and quarterly practice audits. An interrupted time series with segmented regression was completed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 661 patients (337 F), mean age 59±19 years (range 12-98 years), underwent 885 ERCPs during this postintervention period. Of 661 patients, 384 (58%) were referred for CBD stones. A total of 192 biliary stents (105 plastic, 85 metal) were placed during the first ERCP (192/661, 29%), as compared with the preintervention year (223/598, 37%, p=0.2). Furthermore, 13/192 stents (7%) were placed not in accordance with published guidelines (<i>kappa</i>=0.53), compared with 63/223 (28%) in the preintervention year (p<0.0001). A 75% reduction in overall avoidable stent placement was achieved with a direct cost avoidance of $C97 500. For the CBD stone subgroup, there was an 88% reduction in avoidable biliary stent placement compared with the preintervention year (8/384, 2% vs 61/375, 16%, p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Education with audit and feedback supported the closing of a knowledge-to-practice gap for biliary stent insertion during ERCP, especially in patients with CBD stones. This has resulted in a notable reduction of avoidable stent placements and additional follow-up ERCPs and an overall saving of healthcare resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":9235,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340697/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2024-001375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A retrospective chart audit was performed to review biliary stent utilisation from January 2020 to January 2021. Non-guideline-based stent insertion was identified in 16% of patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones presenting for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). To improve this knowledge-practice gap, a quality improvement (QI) intervention was devised and trialled.

Aim: To synchronise clinical indications for biliary stent insertion in patients with CBD stones in accordance with published guidelines.

Methods: Using a QI pre-post study design, chart audits were completed and shared with the ERCP team (n=6). Indication for biliary stent insertion was compared to published guidelines assessed by two reviewers independently (kappa statistic calculated). The QI intervention included an education session and quarterly practice audits. An interrupted time series with segmented regression was completed.

Results: A total of 661 patients (337 F), mean age 59±19 years (range 12-98 years), underwent 885 ERCPs during this postintervention period. Of 661 patients, 384 (58%) were referred for CBD stones. A total of 192 biliary stents (105 plastic, 85 metal) were placed during the first ERCP (192/661, 29%), as compared with the preintervention year (223/598, 37%, p=0.2). Furthermore, 13/192 stents (7%) were placed not in accordance with published guidelines (kappa=0.53), compared with 63/223 (28%) in the preintervention year (p<0.0001). A 75% reduction in overall avoidable stent placement was achieved with a direct cost avoidance of $C97 500. For the CBD stone subgroup, there was an 88% reduction in avoidable biliary stent placement compared with the preintervention year (8/384, 2% vs 61/375, 16%, p<0.0001).

Conclusions: Education with audit and feedback supported the closing of a knowledge-to-practice gap for biliary stent insertion during ERCP, especially in patients with CBD stones. This has resulted in a notable reduction of avoidable stent placements and additional follow-up ERCPs and an overall saving of healthcare resources.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
优化内镜逆行胰胆管造影术中胆道支架置入的适应症:一项旨在加强患者护理和降低医疗资源利用率的质量改进计划。
背景:我们对 2020 年 1 月至 2021 年 1 月期间胆道支架的使用情况进行了回顾性病历审计。在接受内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)的胆总管(CBD)结石患者中,发现有16%的患者未按指南进行支架植入。目的:根据已发布的指南,同步CBD结石患者胆道支架植入的临床适应症:方法:采用质控前-后研究设计,完成病历审核并与ERCP团队(6人)共享。胆道支架植入指征与已发布的指南进行比较,由两名审查员独立评估(计算卡帕统计量)。QI 干预包括教育课程和季度实践审核。结果:干预后期间,共有 661 名患者(337 名女性)接受了 885 次 ERCP,平均年龄为 59±19 岁(12-98 岁)。在 661 名患者中,有 384 人(58%)因 CBD 结石而转诊。在首次ERCP中,共放置了192个胆道支架(105个塑料支架,85个金属支架)(192/661,29%),而干预前一年则为223/598,37%,P=0.2。此外,13/192(7%)个支架的放置不符合已公布的指南(kappa=0.53),而干预前一年为63/223(28%)(p结论:通过审计和反馈教育,缩小了ERCP期间胆道支架置入从知识到实践的差距,尤其是在CBD结石患者中。这显著减少了可避免的支架植入和额外的ERCP随访,节省了医疗资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
BMJ Open Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
68
审稿时长
2 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Gastroenterology is an online-only, peer-reviewed, open access gastroenterology journal, dedicated to publishing high-quality medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas of gastroenterology. It is the open access companion journal of Gut and is co-owned by the British Society of Gastroenterology. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
期刊最新文献
Home-based EXercise and motivAtional programme before and after Liver Transplantation (EXALT): study protocol for phase II two-centre, randomised controlled trial. Patients’ and health professionals’ research priorities for chronic pain associated with inflammatory bowel disease: a co-produced sequential mixed methods Delphi consensus study Serum amyloid A for predicting prognosis in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease Diagnostic application of the ColonFlag AI tool in combination with faecal immunochemical test in patients on an urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway Associations of gut microbiota features and circulating metabolites with systemic inflammation in children.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1