Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable

Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (Impact Factor: 4.9). 06/2007; 65(6):757-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.12.055
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Standardized reporting systems for diagnostic and screening tests facilitate quality improvement programs and clear communication among health care providers. Although colonoscopy is commonly used for screening, diagnosis, and therapy, no standardized reporting system for this procedure currently exists. The Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable developed a reporting and data system for colonoscopy based on continuous quality improvement indicators.
The Task Group systematically reviewed quality indicators recommended by the Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and developed consensus-based terminology for reporting and data systems to capture these data elements. The Task Group included experts in several disciplines: gastroenterology, primary care, diagnostic imaging, and health care delivery.
The standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system provides a tool that can be used for efforts in continuous quality improvement within and across practices that use colonoscopy.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper aimed to assess quality of colonoscopy reports and determine if physicians in practice were already documenting recommended quality indicators, prior to the publication of a standardized Colonoscopy Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) in 2007. We examined 110 colonoscopy reports from 2005-2006 through Maryland Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. We evaluated 25 key data elements recommended by CO-RADS, including procedure indications, risk/comorbidity assessments, procedure technical descriptions, colonoscopy findings, specimen retrieval/pathology. Among 110 reports, 73% documented the bowel preparation quality and 82% documented specific cecal landmarks. For the 177 individual polyps identified, information on size and morphology was documented for 87% and 53%, respectively. Colonoscopy reporting varied considerately in the pre-CO-RADS period. The absence of key data elements may impact the ability to make recommendations for recall intervals. This paper provides baseline data to assess if CO-RADS has an impact on reporting and how best to improve the quality of reporting.
    Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy 09/2010; 2010(1070-3608). DOI:10.1155/2010/419796
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer screening management, especially for those with a genetic predisposition, depends on adequate and standard reporting. Standardized reporting systems for diagnostic and screening tests facilitate quality improvement of programs and clear communication among health care providers. This article presents a comprehensive picture of the information content of colorectal cancer screening in the national plan of Iran, consisting of demographic and medical findings and other standard reports (colonoscopy, pathology, genetics and pedigree data). In addition this review presents data flow in screening and data elements in patient perspectives on colorectal cancer screening.
    Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention: APJCP 10(4):701-6. · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary care clinicians initiate and oversee colorectal screening for their patients, but colonoscopy, a central component of screening programs, is usually performed by consultants. The accuracy and safety of colonoscopy varies among endoscopists, even those with mainstream training and certification. Therefore, it is a primary care responsibility to choose the best available colonoscopy services. A working group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable identified a set of indicators that primary care clinicians can use to assess the quality of colonoscopy services. Quality measures are of actual performance, not training, specialty, or experience alone. The main elements of quality are a complete report, technical competence, and a safe setting for the procedure. We provide explicit criteria that primary care physicians can use when choosing a colonoscopist. Information on quality indicators will be increasingly available with quality improvement efforts within the colonoscopy community and growth in the use of electronic medical records. KEY WORDSprimary care clinicians-colorectal screening-endoscopist-colonoscopist
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 11/2010; 25(11):1230-1234. DOI:10.1007/s11606-010-1446-2 · 3.42 Impact Factor