Quality measures and credentialing in gastrointestinal endoscopy.
OBJECTIVE
Quality assessment and improvement are now mainstream activities in medicine. This review presents recent publications pertaining to quality, proposed quality measures, and associated topics in credentialing and delivery of endoscopic services.


RESULTS
The literature continues to focus primarily on colonoscopy services. Surveillance colonoscopy continues to suffer from underuse in high-risk patients and overuse in average to moderate-risk patients, based upon current guidelines for application. Several series update and add to our understanding of adenoma detection rates as measures of quality. One study confirmed an inverse association between adenoma detection rates at screening endoscopy and the risk for identification of colorectal cancer at a subsequent diagnostic or surveillance procedure. Credentialing guidelines proposed for worldwide application are becoming uniform and similar to those from several national societies. Quality measures for use in endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography are just beginning to be assessed in large series.


CONCLUSIONS
Proposed quality measures for colonoscopy are maturing, with increasing emphasis on adenoma detection rates rather than indirect proxies for neoplasia detection. Personal and unit-based benchmarking appears to be gaining favor and is facilitated by use of automated reporting systems. Greater attention is being focused on individual performance and assuring competence of the endoscopy workforce.
Petersen
Bret T
BT
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55902, USA. petersen.bret@mayo.edu
D003406:Credentialing; D016099:Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal / Q000592:standards*; D005767:Gastrointestinal Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care