Cargando…

Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)

Background and study aims  The endoscopic report has a key role in quality improvement for gastrointestinal endoscopy. High quality standards have been set by the endoscopic societies in this field. Unlike other digestive endoscopy procedures, the quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fusaroli, Pietro, Eloubeidi, Mohamad, Calvanese, Claudio, Dietrich, Christoph, Jenssen, Christian, Saftoiu, Adrian, De Angelis, Claudio, Varadarajulu, Shyam, Napoleon, Bertrand, Lisotti, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8216784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34222644
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1482-7769
_version_ 1783710487867817984
author Fusaroli, Pietro
Eloubeidi, Mohamad
Calvanese, Claudio
Dietrich, Christoph
Jenssen, Christian
Saftoiu, Adrian
De Angelis, Claudio
Varadarajulu, Shyam
Napoleon, Bertrand
Lisotti, Andrea
author_facet Fusaroli, Pietro
Eloubeidi, Mohamad
Calvanese, Claudio
Dietrich, Christoph
Jenssen, Christian
Saftoiu, Adrian
De Angelis, Claudio
Varadarajulu, Shyam
Napoleon, Bertrand
Lisotti, Andrea
author_sort Fusaroli, Pietro
collection PubMed
description Background and study aims  The endoscopic report has a key role in quality improvement for gastrointestinal endoscopy. High quality standards have been set by the endoscopic societies in this field. Unlike other digestive endoscopy procedures, the quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has not been thoroughly evaluated and a reference standard is lacking. Methods  We performed an international online survey concerning the attitudes of endosonographers towards EUS reports in order to understand the needs for standardization and quality improvement. Endosonographers from different countries and institutional setting, with varying case volume and experience were invited to take part to complete a structured questionnaire. Results  We collected replies from 171 endosonographers. Overall analysis of results according to case volume, experience and working environment of respondents (academic, public hospital, private) are provided. In brief, everyone agreed on the need for standardization of EUS reporting. The use of minimal standard terminology and a structured tree with mandatory items was considered of primary importance. Image documentation was also deemed fundamental in complementing EUS reports both for patient documentation and research purposes. A strong demand for connection and consultation among endosonographers for clinical and training needs was also found. In this respect, a formal expert consultation network was advocated in order to improve the quality of reporting in EUS. Conclusions  Our survey showed a strong agreement among endosonographers who expressed the need for a standardization in order to improve the report and, as a consequence, the quality of EUS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8216784
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82167842021-07-01 Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study) Fusaroli, Pietro Eloubeidi, Mohamad Calvanese, Claudio Dietrich, Christoph Jenssen, Christian Saftoiu, Adrian De Angelis, Claudio Varadarajulu, Shyam Napoleon, Bertrand Lisotti, Andrea Endosc Int Open Background and study aims  The endoscopic report has a key role in quality improvement for gastrointestinal endoscopy. High quality standards have been set by the endoscopic societies in this field. Unlike other digestive endoscopy procedures, the quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has not been thoroughly evaluated and a reference standard is lacking. Methods  We performed an international online survey concerning the attitudes of endosonographers towards EUS reports in order to understand the needs for standardization and quality improvement. Endosonographers from different countries and institutional setting, with varying case volume and experience were invited to take part to complete a structured questionnaire. Results  We collected replies from 171 endosonographers. Overall analysis of results according to case volume, experience and working environment of respondents (academic, public hospital, private) are provided. In brief, everyone agreed on the need for standardization of EUS reporting. The use of minimal standard terminology and a structured tree with mandatory items was considered of primary importance. Image documentation was also deemed fundamental in complementing EUS reports both for patient documentation and research purposes. A strong demand for connection and consultation among endosonographers for clinical and training needs was also found. In this respect, a formal expert consultation network was advocated in order to improve the quality of reporting in EUS. Conclusions  Our survey showed a strong agreement among endosonographers who expressed the need for a standardization in order to improve the report and, as a consequence, the quality of EUS. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2021-07 2021-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8216784/ /pubmed/34222644 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1482-7769 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Fusaroli, Pietro
Eloubeidi, Mohamad
Calvanese, Claudio
Dietrich, Christoph
Jenssen, Christian
Saftoiu, Adrian
De Angelis, Claudio
Varadarajulu, Shyam
Napoleon, Bertrand
Lisotti, Andrea
Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title_full Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title_fullStr Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title_full_unstemmed Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title_short Quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: Results of an international multicenter survey (the QUOREUS study)
title_sort quality of reporting in endoscopic ultrasound: results of an international multicenter survey (the quoreus study)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8216784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34222644
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1482-7769
work_keys_str_mv AT fusarolipietro qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT eloubeidimohamad qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT calvaneseclaudio qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT dietrichchristoph qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT jenssenchristian qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT saftoiuadrian qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT deangelisclaudio qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT varadarajulushyam qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT napoleonbertrand qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT lisottiandrea qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy
AT qualityofreportinginendoscopicultrasoundresultsofaninternationalmulticentersurveythequoreusstudy