Development and usability of an endoscopist report card assessing ERCP quality.

IF 6.7 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Gastrointestinal endoscopy Pub Date : 2024-10-12 DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2024.10.010
Suqing Li, Seremi Ibadin, Christina R Studts, Susan E Jelinski, Steven J Heitman, Robert J Hilsden, Rachid Mohamed, Arjun Kundra, Peter McCulloch, Gregory A Coté, James M Scheiman, Rajesh N Keswani, Sachin Wani, B Joseph Elmunzer, Khara M Sauro, Nauzer Forbes
{"title":"Development and usability of an endoscopist report card assessing ERCP quality.","authors":"Suqing Li, Seremi Ibadin, Christina R Studts, Susan E Jelinski, Steven J Heitman, Robert J Hilsden, Rachid Mohamed, Arjun Kundra, Peter McCulloch, Gregory A Coté, James M Scheiman, Rajesh N Keswani, Sachin Wani, B Joseph Elmunzer, Khara M Sauro, Nauzer Forbes","doi":"10.1016/j.gie.2024.10.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Audit and feedback (A&F) for ERCP is relatively understudied despite the demonstrated effectiveness of A&F for endoscopic procedures such as colonoscopy. Endoscopist \"report cards\" are one such A&F tool. We aimed to develop an ERCP report card and assess its appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility through usability testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prototype report card was designed using a combination of published quality indicators and established predictors of adverse events (AEs). Exploratory analyses from a prospective multicenter registry were performed to further identify novel and/or understudied parameters for possible inclusion. Semistructured interviews with ERCP endoscopists were conducted and framework analysis performed. Validated postinterview usability instruments were administered. Feedback was incorporated to create a final report card.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The report card included domains of technical parameters, AE rates and prevention, and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). Qualitative feedback was positive, with respondents agreeing with inclusion of relevant content in most domains. Postinterview instruments revealed adequate appropriateness and acceptability. PREMs were believed by respondents to be poorly actionable and were replaced with appropriateness of indication and fluoroscopy usage parameters in the final report card. Concerns were raised regarding the feasibility of implementation because of reliance on difficult-to-obtain granular intraprocedural data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We designed and tested an ERCP report card that has the potential to be an effective A&F intervention for endoscopists in clinical practice. Although feasibility of data capture and implementation are currently limitations, advances in video recording and artificial intelligence technologies could accelerate widespread adoption of such a tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":12542,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2024.10.010","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Audit and feedback (A&F) for ERCP is relatively understudied despite the demonstrated effectiveness of A&F for endoscopic procedures such as colonoscopy. Endoscopist "report cards" are one such A&F tool. We aimed to develop an ERCP report card and assess its appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility through usability testing.

Methods: A prototype report card was designed using a combination of published quality indicators and established predictors of adverse events (AEs). Exploratory analyses from a prospective multicenter registry were performed to further identify novel and/or understudied parameters for possible inclusion. Semistructured interviews with ERCP endoscopists were conducted and framework analysis performed. Validated postinterview usability instruments were administered. Feedback was incorporated to create a final report card.

Results: The report card included domains of technical parameters, AE rates and prevention, and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). Qualitative feedback was positive, with respondents agreeing with inclusion of relevant content in most domains. Postinterview instruments revealed adequate appropriateness and acceptability. PREMs were believed by respondents to be poorly actionable and were replaced with appropriateness of indication and fluoroscopy usage parameters in the final report card. Concerns were raised regarding the feasibility of implementation because of reliance on difficult-to-obtain granular intraprocedural data.

Conclusions: We designed and tested an ERCP report card that has the potential to be an effective A&F intervention for endoscopists in clinical practice. Although feasibility of data capture and implementation are currently limitations, advances in video recording and artificial intelligence technologies could accelerate widespread adoption of such a tool.

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
评估 ERCP 质量的内镜医师报告卡的开发和可用性。
背景和目的:内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)的审核与反馈(A&F)研究相对较少,尽管结肠镜检查等内镜手术的审核与反馈已被证明有效。内镜医师 "报告卡 "是一种 A&F 工具。我们旨在开发 ERCP 报告卡,并通过可用性测试评估其适宜性、可接受性和可行性:方法:结合已公布的质量指标和已确定的不良事件(AE)预测指标,设计了报告卡原型。对前瞻性多中心登记进行了探索性分析,以进一步确定可能纳入的新参数和/或未充分研究的参数。对 ERCP 内镜医师进行了半结构式访谈,并进行了框架分析。对访谈后的可用性工具进行了验证。结果:报告单包括技术参数、AE 发生率/预防和患者报告的体验测量(PREMs)。定性反馈是积极的,受访者同意将相关内容纳入大多数领域。访谈后的工具显示了适当性和可接受性。受访者认为 PREMs 的可操作性较差,因此在最终报告卡中用适应症适当性和透视使用参数取代了 PREMs。由于依赖于难以获得的细粒度术中数据,实施的可行性受到了关注:我们设计并测试了 ERCP 报告卡,它有可能成为内镜医师在临床实践中有效的 A&F 干预措施。虽然目前数据采集和实施的可行性受到限制,但视频记录和人工智能技术的进步可能会加速这种工具的广泛应用。
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
Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Gastrointestinal endoscopy 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
7.80%
发文量
1441
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy is a journal publishing original, peer-reviewed articles on endoscopic procedures for studying, diagnosing, and treating digestive diseases. It covers outcomes research, prospective studies, and controlled trials of new endoscopic instruments and treatment methods. The online features include full-text articles, video and audio clips, and MEDLINE links. The journal serves as an international forum for the latest developments in the specialty, offering challenging reports from authorities worldwide. It also publishes abstracts of significant articles from other clinical publications, accompanied by expert commentaries.
期刊最新文献
A Rare Case of Gastric Mass Due to Adrenal Tuberculosis Presenting Without Typical Clinical Manifestations of Addison's Disease. A Rare Presentation of Esophagopericardial Fistula Arising from Benign Ulcer. An Uncommon Esophageal Mass with Dynamic Changes. An Unusual Case of Pancreatic Cystic Mass. Ergonomic Impact of an Automated Device for Endoscopic Tool Insertion and Transfer.
×
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