Appropriateness and Safety of Direct Access Endoscopy in Hospitalized Patients.

diagnosis diagnostic efficacy direct access endoscopy gastroenterology gastrointestinal endoscopy hospitalists inpatients referral and consultation

Journal

Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 Nov 2020
Historique:
entrez: 17 12 2020
pubmed: 18 12 2020
medline: 18 12 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Background and objective Direct access endoscopy (DAE) allows hospitalists to refer patients for endoscopy without a gastroenterologist (GI) evaluation, potentially decreasing wait time and facilitating earlier discharge from the hospital. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DAE for average-risk endoscopic procedures. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed by comparing patients who underwent a DAE with patients who underwent an endoscopy ordered by GI physicians at a tertiary care hospital. The procedure indications were obtained from the endoscopy reports and hospitalist progress notes. Appropriateness of each procedure was determined based on the guidelines from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). Findings, procedure-related complications, and clinical significance were recorded. Results A total of 110 patients were included in this study; 40 were DAE and 70 were ordered by GI. The mean age of the patients was 55.5 years with 69 males and 41 females. In the DAE group, there were 31 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD) and nine colonoscopies performed, while in the GI group, there were 58 EGDs, 11 colonoscopies, and one push enteroscopy. All procedures fulfilled ASGE criteria; 20/40 DAE and 53/70 GI-ordered procedures had clinically significant findings. There was one complication in each group. Conclusion DAE allows a hospitalist to order an endoscopy without consultation with a GI physician. This study showed that all DAE procedures had met ASGE criteria for appropriateness, with 50% having clinically significant findings and no difference in adverse events. These results suggest that DAE is safe and effective in evaluating hospitalized patients for average-risk endoscopy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33329951
doi: 10.7759/cureus.11453
pmc: PMC7734886
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e11453

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020, D'Souza et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

Gastrointest Endosc. 2007 Aug;66(2):213-8
pubmed: 17643691
Br Med J. 1979 Feb 17;1(6161):457-9
pubmed: 427408
Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Jun;75(6):1127-31
pubmed: 22624807
Surgeon. 2013 Dec;11(6):304-8
pubmed: 23510705
Lancet. 1974 Aug 17;2(7877):394-7
pubmed: 4136718
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Feb;57(2):183-6
pubmed: 12556781
Gastrointest Endosc. 1999 Dec;50(6):906-9
pubmed: 10644188

Auteurs

Felicia R D'Souza (FR)

Hospital Medicine, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, USA.

Aymen Almuhaidb (A)

Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, USA.

Dayna Early (D)

Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, USA.

Osama Altayar (O)

Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, USA.

Mark Thoelke (M)

Hospital Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, USA.

Classifications MeSH