Subscribe to RSS
Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.
https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00000012.xml
Endoscopy 2009; 41(12): 1075-1077
DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1215359
DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1215359
Editorial
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Quality assurance and credentialing in endoscopy: why drown us in paperwork and regulations?
Further Information
Publication History
Publication Date:
04 December 2009 (online)
![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/endoscopy/200912/lookinside/thumbnails/10.1055-s-0029-1215359-1.jpg)
Introduction
OMED, the World Organization of Digestive Endoscopy, is the latest body to present proposed guidelines for endoscopy [1]. Guidelines have also been published by the European Board of Gastroenterology, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the UK Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG).
Why are we subjected to intrusive guidelines from external working groups? After all, none of the recommendations are supported by ”level A” evidence.
References
- 1 Faigel D O, Cotton P B. The London OMED position statement for credentialing and quality assurance in digestive endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2009; 41 1069-1074
- 2 Bowles C JA, Leicester R, Romaya C. et al . A prospective study of colonoscopy practice in the UK today: are we adequately prepared for national colorectal cancer screening tomorrow?. Gut. 2004; 53 277-283
- 3 Atkin W, Rogers P, Cardwell C. et al . Wide variation in adenoma detection rates at screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gastroenterology. 2004; 126 1247-1256
- 4 Wilkins T, LeClair B, Smolkin M. et al . Screening colonoscopies by primary care physicians: a meta-analysis. Ann Fam Med. 2009; 7 56-62
- 5 NCEPOD .Scoping our practice. The 2004 report of the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death. 2004 Available from: http://www.ncepod.org.uk/2004sop.htm; Publication date: 3/10/2009
- 6 British Society of Gastroenterology .UK comparative audit of upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the use of blood. London; 2007 Available from: http://www.bsg.org.uk/pdf_word_docs/blood_audit_report_07.pdf; Publication date: 12/2007
- 7 Sharma V K, Coppola A G, Raufman J P. A survey of credentialing practices of gastrointestinal endoscopy centers in the United States. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2005; 39 501-507
- 8 Baillie J, Testoni P A. Are we meeting the standards set for ERCP?. Gut. 2007; 56 744-746
- 9 Expert Group on Learning from Adverse Events in the NHS .An organisation with a memory. London; Stationery Office; 2000 http://Available from: www.doh.gov.uk/orgmemreport/index.htm; Publication date: 3/6/2000
- 10 Kohn L T, Corrigan J M, Donaldson M S. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC; National Academy Press 2000
- 11 Fassett , WE . Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005. Ann Pharmacother. 2006; 40 917-924; Epub 25 Apr 2006. DOI 10.1345/aph.1G485
- 12 Health Policy and Economic Research Unit .BMA survey. Speaking up for patients. Final report. 2009 http://Available from: www.bma.org.uk/ethics/doctor_relationships/whistleblowingsurvey.jsp; Publication date: 1/6/2009
- 13 Freeman M L. Adverse outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Rev Gastroenterol Disord. 2002; 2 147-168
- 14 Helmreich R. On error management: lessons from aviation. Br Med J. 2000; 320 781-785
- 15 Risser D T, Rice M M, Salisbury M L. et al . The potential for improved teamwork to reduce medical errors in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1999; 34 373-383
- 16 Joint Advisory Group on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (JAG) .GRS. Global rating scale. Available from: http://www.grs.nhs.uk/Default.aspx
B. RembackenMD
Centre for Digestive Diseases
The General Infirmary at Leeds
Great George Street
Leeds LS1 3EX, UK
Fax: +44-113-392--8659
Email: bj.rembacken@ntlworld.com