Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Cerqueira, Rute
Data de Publicação: 2008
Outros Autores: Fernandes, Carolina, Correia, Manuel, Manso, M Conceição
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643
Resumo: The appropriateness of the indications for upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy (EGD) is crucial in assessing quality in endoscopy units, improving cost-effectiveness and providing better patient care. Using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines, the aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriate use of EGD and to measure the local accuracy of these guidelines.Over a two year period information was gathered on 2305 consecutive patients--1146 (50% males)--of whom had an EGD performed at our unit. Patients were referred for EGD by other physicians of the hospital staff or through the gastroenterology out-patient clinic. The appropriateness, sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the ASGE guidelines were established using EGD diagnosis as gold standard. Atrophic gastritis and hiatus hernia were considered irrelevant diagnosis.According to the ASGE guidelines the rate of inappropriateness was 20%. No lesions or irrelevant lesions were found in 30.6% EGD. Appropriately indicated endoscopies disclosed significantly more clinically relevant findings (71.3%) than endoscopies performed with indications that were not ASGE listed (61.7%) - p < 0.01, OR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.24-1.92) but no significant difference was found between appropriateness and inappropriateness in patients with a diagnosis of gastric cancer: p = 0.21, OR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.75-3.21). The sensitivity of the ASGE criteria was 82.1%, the specificity 25.2%, the positive predictive value 71% and the negative predictive value 38.1%. Gastric cancer was found in 10 (0.4%) of the patients not appropriately indicated.In this Portuguese population sample, the accuracy of the ASGE guidelines is too low to be confidently acceptable. This suggests that, in Portugal, a country with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, wider criteria must be applied, if useful local guidelines for appropriate referrals are expected.
id RCAP_b16fce58c8cdfc3fea981e87fcb06919
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/1643
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.The appropriateness of the indications for upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy (EGD) is crucial in assessing quality in endoscopy units, improving cost-effectiveness and providing better patient care. Using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines, the aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriate use of EGD and to measure the local accuracy of these guidelines.Over a two year period information was gathered on 2305 consecutive patients--1146 (50% males)--of whom had an EGD performed at our unit. Patients were referred for EGD by other physicians of the hospital staff or through the gastroenterology out-patient clinic. The appropriateness, sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the ASGE guidelines were established using EGD diagnosis as gold standard. Atrophic gastritis and hiatus hernia were considered irrelevant diagnosis.According to the ASGE guidelines the rate of inappropriateness was 20%. No lesions or irrelevant lesions were found in 30.6% EGD. Appropriately indicated endoscopies disclosed significantly more clinically relevant findings (71.3%) than endoscopies performed with indications that were not ASGE listed (61.7%) - p < 0.01, OR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.24-1.92) but no significant difference was found between appropriateness and inappropriateness in patients with a diagnosis of gastric cancer: p = 0.21, OR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.75-3.21). The sensitivity of the ASGE criteria was 82.1%, the specificity 25.2%, the positive predictive value 71% and the negative predictive value 38.1%. Gastric cancer was found in 10 (0.4%) of the patients not appropriately indicated.In this Portuguese population sample, the accuracy of the ASGE guidelines is too low to be confidently acceptable. This suggests that, in Portugal, a country with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, wider criteria must be applied, if useful local guidelines for appropriate referrals are expected.The appropriateness of the indications for upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy (EGD) is crucial in assessing quality in endoscopy units, improving cost-effectiveness and providing better patient care. Using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines, the aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriate use of EGD and to measure the local accuracy of these guidelines.Over a two year period information was gathered on 2305 consecutive patients--1146 (50% males)--of whom had an EGD performed at our unit. Patients were referred for EGD by other physicians of the hospital staff or through the gastroenterology out-patient clinic. The appropriateness, sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the ASGE guidelines were established using EGD diagnosis as gold standard. Atrophic gastritis and hiatus hernia were considered irrelevant diagnosis.According to the ASGE guidelines the rate of inappropriateness was 20%. No lesions or irrelevant lesions were found in 30.6% EGD. Appropriately indicated endoscopies disclosed significantly more clinically relevant findings (71.3%) than endoscopies performed with indications that were not ASGE listed (61.7%) - p < 0.01, OR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.24-1.92) but no significant difference was found between appropriateness and inappropriateness in patients with a diagnosis of gastric cancer: p = 0.21, OR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.75-3.21). The sensitivity of the ASGE criteria was 82.1%, the specificity 25.2%, the positive predictive value 71% and the negative predictive value 38.1%. Gastric cancer was found in 10 (0.4%) of the patients not appropriately indicated.In this Portuguese population sample, the accuracy of the ASGE guidelines is too low to be confidently acceptable. This suggests that, in Portugal, a country with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, wider criteria must be applied, if useful local guidelines for appropriate referrals are expected.Ordem dos Médicos2008-10-30info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/1643Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 21 No. 5 (2008): Setembro-Outubro; 427-32Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 21 N.º 5 (2008): Setembro-Outubro; 427-321646-07580870-399Xreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPporhttps://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643/1225Cerqueira, RuteFernandes, CarolinaCorreia, ManuelManso, M Conceiçãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-12-20T10:58:26Zoai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/1643Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:17:17.831333Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
title Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
spellingShingle Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
Cerqueira, Rute
title_short Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
title_full Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
title_fullStr Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
title_full_unstemmed Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
title_sort Indications for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The accuracy of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines in a Portuguese hospital.
author Cerqueira, Rute
author_facet Cerqueira, Rute
Fernandes, Carolina
Correia, Manuel
Manso, M Conceição
author_role author
author2 Fernandes, Carolina
Correia, Manuel
Manso, M Conceição
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Cerqueira, Rute
Fernandes, Carolina
Correia, Manuel
Manso, M Conceição
description The appropriateness of the indications for upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy (EGD) is crucial in assessing quality in endoscopy units, improving cost-effectiveness and providing better patient care. Using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines, the aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriate use of EGD and to measure the local accuracy of these guidelines.Over a two year period information was gathered on 2305 consecutive patients--1146 (50% males)--of whom had an EGD performed at our unit. Patients were referred for EGD by other physicians of the hospital staff or through the gastroenterology out-patient clinic. The appropriateness, sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of the ASGE guidelines were established using EGD diagnosis as gold standard. Atrophic gastritis and hiatus hernia were considered irrelevant diagnosis.According to the ASGE guidelines the rate of inappropriateness was 20%. No lesions or irrelevant lesions were found in 30.6% EGD. Appropriately indicated endoscopies disclosed significantly more clinically relevant findings (71.3%) than endoscopies performed with indications that were not ASGE listed (61.7%) - p < 0.01, OR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.24-1.92) but no significant difference was found between appropriateness and inappropriateness in patients with a diagnosis of gastric cancer: p = 0.21, OR = 1.53, 95% CI (0.75-3.21). The sensitivity of the ASGE criteria was 82.1%, the specificity 25.2%, the positive predictive value 71% and the negative predictive value 38.1%. Gastric cancer was found in 10 (0.4%) of the patients not appropriately indicated.In this Portuguese population sample, the accuracy of the ASGE guidelines is too low to be confidently acceptable. This suggests that, in Portugal, a country with a high prevalence of gastric cancer, wider criteria must be applied, if useful local guidelines for appropriate referrals are expected.
publishDate 2008
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2008-10-30
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643
oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/1643
url https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.www.actamedicaportuguesa.com:article/1643
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643
https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/1643/1225
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Ordem dos Médicos
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Ordem dos Médicos
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 21 No. 5 (2008): Setembro-Outubro; 427-32
Acta Médica Portuguesa; Vol. 21 N.º 5 (2008): Setembro-Outubro; 427-32
1646-0758
0870-399X
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1817551690366189568