Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: Results of an ASGE working party

Peter B. Cotton; Glenn Eisen; Joseph Romagnuolo; John Vargo; Todd Baron; Paul Tarnasky; Steve Schutz; Brian Jacobson; Chris Bott; Bret Petersen

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036

Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: Results of an ASGE working party

Peter B. Cotton, Glenn Eisen, Joseph Romagnuolo, John Vargo, Todd Baron, Paul Tarnasky, Steve Schutz, Brian Jacobson, Chris Bott, Bret Petersen

Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

116 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Working parties of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Quality Committee recently published a proposed new lexicon for adverse events and a separate extensive review of risk factors. The complexity of procedures also affects outcomes. Objective: To establish a system for grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures. Design: Voting on levels 1 (easiest) to 4 (most difficult) on a list of possible procedures and contexts. Setting: Community and academic gastroenterologists in the United States, Canada, and Britain. Main Outcome Measurements: Median scores of votes cast. Results: Consensus list of levels 1 through 4 contexts and procedures. Limitations: Eminence rather than evidence based. Conclusions: A consensus list was developed for comments and testing to complement the proposed lexicons for adverse events and risk factors.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	868-874
Number of pages	7
Journal	Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Volume	73
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036
State	Published - May 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Gastroenterology

Access to Document

10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036

Cite this

@article{3f4a8bc2a9fc492e80b6cc93e0e0f769,

title = "Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: Results of an ASGE working party",

abstract = "Background: Working parties of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Quality Committee recently published a proposed new lexicon for adverse events and a separate extensive review of risk factors. The complexity of procedures also affects outcomes. Objective: To establish a system for grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures. Design: Voting on levels 1 (easiest) to 4 (most difficult) on a list of possible procedures and contexts. Setting: Community and academic gastroenterologists in the United States, Canada, and Britain. Main Outcome Measurements: Median scores of votes cast. Results: Consensus list of levels 1 through 4 contexts and procedures. Limitations: Eminence rather than evidence based. Conclusions: A consensus list was developed for comments and testing to complement the proposed lexicons for adverse events and risk factors.",

author = "Cotton, {Peter B.} and Glenn Eisen and Joseph Romagnuolo and John Vargo and Todd Baron and Paul Tarnasky and Steve Schutz and Brian Jacobson and Chris Bott and Bret Petersen",

year = "2011",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "73",

pages = "868--874",

journal = "Gastrointestinal endoscopy",

issn = "0016-5107",

publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures

T2 - Results of an ASGE working party

AU - Cotton, Peter B.

AU - Eisen, Glenn

AU - Romagnuolo, Joseph

AU - Vargo, John

AU - Baron, Todd

AU - Tarnasky, Paul

AU - Schutz, Steve

AU - Jacobson, Brian

AU - Bott, Chris

AU - Petersen, Bret

PY - 2011/5

Y1 - 2011/5

N2 - Background: Working parties of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Quality Committee recently published a proposed new lexicon for adverse events and a separate extensive review of risk factors. The complexity of procedures also affects outcomes. Objective: To establish a system for grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures. Design: Voting on levels 1 (easiest) to 4 (most difficult) on a list of possible procedures and contexts. Setting: Community and academic gastroenterologists in the United States, Canada, and Britain. Main Outcome Measurements: Median scores of votes cast. Results: Consensus list of levels 1 through 4 contexts and procedures. Limitations: Eminence rather than evidence based. Conclusions: A consensus list was developed for comments and testing to complement the proposed lexicons for adverse events and risk factors.

AB - Background: Working parties of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Quality Committee recently published a proposed new lexicon for adverse events and a separate extensive review of risk factors. The complexity of procedures also affects outcomes. Objective: To establish a system for grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures. Design: Voting on levels 1 (easiest) to 4 (most difficult) on a list of possible procedures and contexts. Setting: Community and academic gastroenterologists in the United States, Canada, and Britain. Main Outcome Measurements: Median scores of votes cast. Results: Consensus list of levels 1 through 4 contexts and procedures. Limitations: Eminence rather than evidence based. Conclusions: A consensus list was developed for comments and testing to complement the proposed lexicons for adverse events and risk factors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955418811&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955418811&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036

DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 21377673

AN - SCOPUS:79955418811

SN - 0016-5107

VL - 73

SP - 868

EP - 874

JO - Gastrointestinal endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal endoscopy

IS - 5

ER -

Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: Results of an ASGE working party

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this