Implementing educational interventions and key performance measures sustains quality of endoscopic assessment in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

IF 2.2 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Endoscopy International Open Pub Date : 2025-03-14 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2542-0618
Deloshaan Subhaharan, Pradeep Kakkadasam Ramaswamy, Mark Jones, Sneha John
{"title":"Implementing educational interventions and key performance measures sustains quality of endoscopic assessment in patients with Barrett's esophagus.","authors":"Deloshaan Subhaharan, Pradeep Kakkadasam Ramaswamy, Mark Jones, Sneha John","doi":"10.1055/a-2542-0618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and study aims: </strong>Quality metrics for Barrett's esophagus (BE) are anticipated to improve outcomes for patients through earlier detection of neoplasia. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has developed guidelines to homogenize endoscopic quality in BE. Our study aimed to assess the impact of recommended key performance measures (KPMs) and their sustainability.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A single-center, retrospective study (Phase 1) was conducted over 8 weeks. The KPMs assessed were: 1) pre-procedure metrics including indication, consent, safety checklist (target of 100%); and 2) Prague classification, Seattle protocol, or targeted biopsies, inspection time of 1 minute per cm, advanced imaging and surveillance recommendations (target of 90%). Following baseline analysis, multimodal educational interventions were implemented and repeated at 6-month intervals. Repeat analysis was performed at 6 months and 1 and 3 years (Phases 2, 3 and 4 respectively).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Phase 1, 39 patients with BE underwent endoscopy. Phase 2 evaluated 40 patients with BE. Phase 3 analyzed 59 patients with BE, and Phase 4 identified 34 patients with BE. Pre-procedure metrics were met in 100% of patients across the 3-year period. Baseline analysis displayed suboptimal performance at 45% to 75% for all other KPMs. However, after regular multimodal educational interventions, quality standards significantly improved and were able to be maintained over all phases, achieving pre-set targets of >9 0% for all KPMs except one.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sustaining improvements in quality metrics in Barrett's endoscopy is important. Our study suggests that regular, replicable education interventions have a positive effect and allow sustained long-term improvements in quality metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":11671,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy International Open","volume":"13 ","pages":"a25420618"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11922174/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2542-0618","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and study aims: Quality metrics for Barrett's esophagus (BE) are anticipated to improve outcomes for patients through earlier detection of neoplasia. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has developed guidelines to homogenize endoscopic quality in BE. Our study aimed to assess the impact of recommended key performance measures (KPMs) and their sustainability.

Patients and methods: A single-center, retrospective study (Phase 1) was conducted over 8 weeks. The KPMs assessed were: 1) pre-procedure metrics including indication, consent, safety checklist (target of 100%); and 2) Prague classification, Seattle protocol, or targeted biopsies, inspection time of 1 minute per cm, advanced imaging and surveillance recommendations (target of 90%). Following baseline analysis, multimodal educational interventions were implemented and repeated at 6-month intervals. Repeat analysis was performed at 6 months and 1 and 3 years (Phases 2, 3 and 4 respectively).

Results: In Phase 1, 39 patients with BE underwent endoscopy. Phase 2 evaluated 40 patients with BE. Phase 3 analyzed 59 patients with BE, and Phase 4 identified 34 patients with BE. Pre-procedure metrics were met in 100% of patients across the 3-year period. Baseline analysis displayed suboptimal performance at 45% to 75% for all other KPMs. However, after regular multimodal educational interventions, quality standards significantly improved and were able to be maintained over all phases, achieving pre-set targets of >9 0% for all KPMs except one.

Conclusions: Sustaining improvements in quality metrics in Barrett's endoscopy is important. Our study suggests that regular, replicable education interventions have a positive effect and allow sustained long-term improvements in quality metrics.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Endoscopy International Open
Endoscopy International Open GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
3.80%
发文量
270
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic submucosal dissection for high-risk lesions in the right colon: Limited benefits and significant challenges. Conventional small-bowel capsule endoscopy reading vs proprietary artificial intelligence auxiliary systems: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Cost-effectiveness analysis of artificial intelligence-aided colonoscopy for adenoma detection and characterization in Spain. Efficacy of a higher-flexibility duodenal stent for palliation of gastric outlet obstruction. Endoscopic band ligation alone and combined with clipping for colonic diverticular bleeding: Retrospective comparative study.
×
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