the impact of colonoscopy quality control table on adenoma detection rates
Clicks: 331
ID: 242355
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
74.5
/100
331 views
270 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #13 of 188 articles by views in colloids and surfaces a: physicochemical and engineering aspects
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 188 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Objective. This study aims to investigate the effects of reporting colonoscopy findings and the regular review of outcomes on adenoma detection rates. Methods. Patients who underwent colonoscopy from August 2013 to February 2014 were selected as the intervention group. The preintervention group included patients who underwent colonoscopy from January 2013 to July 2013, in which the procedure sheet for this group of patients was not accomplished. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes included the success rate of intubation and withdrawal time. Results. This study included 2,467 cases: 1,302 cases in the intervention group and 1,165 cases in the preintervention group. There was no significant difference in demographic characteristics between the two groups. In the intervention group, withdrawal time of colonoscopy was longer (P<0.01), and the success rate of intubation (92.5% versus 89.1%, P<0.05) and detection rate of polyps (32.6% versus 27.6%, P<0.05) and adenomas (20.0% versus 16.1%, P<0.05) were higher. Significantly high detection rates for proximal adenomas, flat adenomas, and adenomas with a diameter <5 mm were observed in the intervention group (all P<0.01). Conclusion. The reporting and review of procedure details help to improve quality indicators of colonoscopy.
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (121 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
deng2016gastroenterologythe
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Bin Deng;Jiehua Zhi;Yaosheng Chen;Lanyu Liang;Jian Wu;Xuefen Gao;Weiming Xiao;Yanbing Ding |
| Journal | colloids and surfaces a: physicochemical and engineering aspects |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.1155/2016/2548109
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.