Cargando…

A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE

BACKGROUND: High quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) depends on the ability to appropriately visualize upper gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa pathology. Evaluation can be limited by the presence of mucus, foam, bubbles and solid materials. Currently, there is no standardized method to assess mucosa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seleq, S, Khan, R, Gimpaya, N, Vargas, J I, Amin, S, Bilal, M, Bollipo, S, Charabaty, A, de-Madaria, E, Hashim, A, Kral, J, Pawlak, K M, Sandhu, D S, Lui, R N, Sanchez-Luna, S, Siau, K, Mosko, J, Grover, S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859122/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.031
_version_ 1784654383900786688
author Seleq, S
Khan, R
Gimpaya, N
Vargas, J I
Amin, S
Bilal, M
Bollipo, S
Charabaty, A
de-Madaria, E
Hashim, A
Kral, J
Pawlak, K M
Sandhu, D S
Lui, R N
Sanchez-Luna, S
Siau, K
Mosko, J
Grover, S
author_facet Seleq, S
Khan, R
Gimpaya, N
Vargas, J I
Amin, S
Bilal, M
Bollipo, S
Charabaty, A
de-Madaria, E
Hashim, A
Kral, J
Pawlak, K M
Sandhu, D S
Lui, R N
Sanchez-Luna, S
Siau, K
Mosko, J
Grover, S
author_sort Seleq, S
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: High quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) depends on the ability to appropriately visualize upper gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa pathology. Evaluation can be limited by the presence of mucus, foam, bubbles and solid materials. Currently, there is no standardized method to assess mucosal visualization for use in clinical or research settings. AIMS: To develop and establish the content validity of the Toronto Upper Gastrointestinal Cleaning Score (TUGCS) and evaluate its interrater reliability. METHODS: An international panel of endoscopy experts rated potential items and their associated anchors for importance as indicators of adequacy of mucosal visualization during EGD. The survey utilized a Likert scale (1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)). The Delphi process was repeated until consensus was reached. Consensus was defined priori as ≥80% of experts in a given round scoring ≥4 on all survey items. To assess content validity, 48 EGD procedures were evaluated in real-time by two endoscopist reviewers using the TUGCS at a single institution. The interrater agreement between assessments was calculated for TUGCS total scores using intraclass correlation coefficient, one-way random effects model (ICC 1,1). RESULTS: Fourteen experts agreed to be part of the Delphi panel. An anatomical framework representing the upper GI mucosa and anchors for each mucosal portion representing various levels of visibility was generated through systematic review. Three survey rounds, with response rates of 100%, 100% and 71% respectively, achieved consensus. The final TUGCS includes four anatomical areas (fundus, body, antrum, duodenum) and mucosal visualization anchors ranging from 0 to 3 (Figure 1). TUGCS was used to assess foregut cleaning in 48 procedures (Table 1). The mean TUGCS for staff and trainee were 8.1 (±2.4) and 8.1 (±2.6), respectively. The ICC was 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.62–0.88) indicating good reliability. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and generated content validity evidence for the TUGCS through rigorous Delphi methodology, reflective of practice across different centres. Planned as future research is a video survey distributed to endoscopists internationally to further validate the TUGCS to create a tool that may be used to judge mucosal visualization for EGD in research and clinical settings. FUNDING AGENCIES: None
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8859122
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88591222022-02-22 A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE Seleq, S Khan, R Gimpaya, N Vargas, J I Amin, S Bilal, M Bollipo, S Charabaty, A de-Madaria, E Hashim, A Kral, J Pawlak, K M Sandhu, D S Lui, R N Sanchez-Luna, S Siau, K Mosko, J Grover, S J Can Assoc Gastroenterol Poster of Distinction BACKGROUND: High quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) depends on the ability to appropriately visualize upper gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa pathology. Evaluation can be limited by the presence of mucus, foam, bubbles and solid materials. Currently, there is no standardized method to assess mucosal visualization for use in clinical or research settings. AIMS: To develop and establish the content validity of the Toronto Upper Gastrointestinal Cleaning Score (TUGCS) and evaluate its interrater reliability. METHODS: An international panel of endoscopy experts rated potential items and their associated anchors for importance as indicators of adequacy of mucosal visualization during EGD. The survey utilized a Likert scale (1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)). The Delphi process was repeated until consensus was reached. Consensus was defined priori as ≥80% of experts in a given round scoring ≥4 on all survey items. To assess content validity, 48 EGD procedures were evaluated in real-time by two endoscopist reviewers using the TUGCS at a single institution. The interrater agreement between assessments was calculated for TUGCS total scores using intraclass correlation coefficient, one-way random effects model (ICC 1,1). RESULTS: Fourteen experts agreed to be part of the Delphi panel. An anatomical framework representing the upper GI mucosa and anchors for each mucosal portion representing various levels of visibility was generated through systematic review. Three survey rounds, with response rates of 100%, 100% and 71% respectively, achieved consensus. The final TUGCS includes four anatomical areas (fundus, body, antrum, duodenum) and mucosal visualization anchors ranging from 0 to 3 (Figure 1). TUGCS was used to assess foregut cleaning in 48 procedures (Table 1). The mean TUGCS for staff and trainee were 8.1 (±2.4) and 8.1 (±2.6), respectively. The ICC was 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.62–0.88) indicating good reliability. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and generated content validity evidence for the TUGCS through rigorous Delphi methodology, reflective of practice across different centres. Planned as future research is a video survey distributed to endoscopists internationally to further validate the TUGCS to create a tool that may be used to judge mucosal visualization for EGD in research and clinical settings. FUNDING AGENCIES: None Oxford University Press 2022-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8859122/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.031 Text en ڣ The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Poster of Distinction
Seleq, S
Khan, R
Gimpaya, N
Vargas, J I
Amin, S
Bilal, M
Bollipo, S
Charabaty, A
de-Madaria, E
Hashim, A
Kral, J
Pawlak, K M
Sandhu, D S
Lui, R N
Sanchez-Luna, S
Siau, K
Mosko, J
Grover, S
A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title_full A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title_fullStr A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title_full_unstemmed A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title_short A32 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE TORONTO UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CLEANING SCORE
title_sort a32 development and validation of the toronto upper gastrointestinal cleaning score
topic Poster of Distinction
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8859122/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcag/gwab049.031
work_keys_str_mv AT seleqs a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT khanr a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT gimpayan a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT vargasji a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT amins a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT bilalm a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT bollipos a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT charabatya a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT demadariae a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT hashima a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT kralj a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT pawlakkm a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT sandhuds a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT luirn a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT sanchezlunas a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT siauk a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT moskoj a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore
AT grovers a32developmentandvalidationofthetorontouppergastrointestinalcleaningscore