Quality measurement and improvement in colonoscopy

Gurudu, Suryakanth R.; Ramirez, Francisco C.

doi:10.1016/j.tgie.2011.10.002

Cited by 8 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The clinician can manually retrieve the robot in its passive state by activating a mechanical release mechanism to collapse the arms and then by pulling on the tether 2 . Surgical tools could be positioned at various locations on the chassis, but our current solution involves a detachable module at the front of the robot 3 . For example, this module could house a camera, light source and embedded control boards ( Fig.…”

Section: A Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Early diagnosis can greatly improve cancer survival rates [2], so the reliability of the procedure is of utmost importance. Despite its frequent use, there are a number of drawbacks to using a colonoscope (endoscope), namely: impaired visibility due to poor bowel preparation; patient discomfort from looping of the colonoscope; and limited access caused by bowel tortuosity [1,3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

RollerBall: A mobile robot for intraluminal locomotion

Norton

Hood

Neville

et al. 2016

2016 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-There are currently a number of major drawbacks to using a colonoscope that limit its efficacy. One solution to this may be to use a warm liquid to distend the colon during inspection. Another is to replace the colonoscope with a small mobile robot -a solution many believe is the future of gastrointestinal intervention. This paper presents RollerBall, an intraluminal robot that uses wheeled-locomotion to traverse the length of a fluid-filled colon. The device provides a central, stable platform within the lumen for the use of diagnostic and therapeutic tools. The concept is described in detail and the feasibility demonstrated in a series of tests in a synthetic colon.

show abstract

Section: A Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

RollerBall: A mobile robot for intraluminal locomotion

Norton

Hood

Neville

et al. 2016

2016 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, they can be used to assess characteristics of care (structural), the delivery of care (process), or the results of care (outcomes). In particular, these measures can be developed in relation to diagnostics, management, patient prevention, or administration function 2 . While quality measures can be used as a means to identify those providing high-quality care and thus provide a mechanism to reward those for this practice, they can also be used as a means to penalize those who fail to meet the expected standards 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality measures in endoscopy: A systematic analysis of the overall scientific level of evidence and conflicts of interest

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and study aims Quality measures were established to develop standards to help assess quality of care, yet variation in endoscopy exists. We performed a systematic review to assess the overall quality of evidence cited in formulating quality measures in endoscopy. Methods A systematic search was performed on multiple databases from inception until November 15, 2020, to examine the quality measures proposed by all major societies. Quality measures were assessed for their level of quality evidence and categorized as category A (guideline-based), category B (observational studies) or category C (expert opinion). They were also examined for the type of measure (process, structure, outcome), the quality, measurability, review, existing conflicts of interest (COI), and patient participation of the quality measure. Results An aggregate total of 214 quality measures from nine societies (15 manuscripts) were included and analyzed. Of quality measures in endoscopy, 71.5 %, 23.8 %, and 4.7 % were based on low, moderate, and high quality of evidence, respectively. The proportion of high-quality evidence across societies was significantly different (P = 0.028). Of quality measures, 76 % were quantifiable, 18 % contained patient-centric outcomes, and 7 % reported outcome measures. None of the organizations reported on patient involvement or external review, six disclosed existing COI, and 40 % were published more than 5 years ago. Conclusions Quality measures are important to standardize clinical practice. Because over 70 % of quality measures in endoscopy are based on low-quality evidence, further studies are needed to improve the overall quality to effectively set a standard, reduce variation, and improve care in endoscopic practice.

show abstract

“…The effectiveness of colonoscopy depends on adequate visualization of the entire colon and diligence during examination of the mucosa. Many colon segments can have low diagnostic yield caused by transiently rapid withdrawal, for example, when passing acute angulations of the organ [21] . A quality indicator that is only based on the total withdrawal time cannot recover information about colon segments which have been poorly visualized due to rapid withdrawal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%