Overuse and underuse of colonoscopy in a European primary care setting

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 593-599

  Vader, John Paul ^a,b   Pache, Isabelle ^a,b   Froehlich, Florian ^a,b   Burnand, Bernard ^a,b   Schneider, Catherine ^a,b   Dubois, Robert W ^a,b   Brook, Robert H ^a,b   Gonvers, Jean Jacques ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COLONOSCOPY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOM; GENERAL PRACTICE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SWITZERLAND;

EID: 0033753851     PISSN: 00165107     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mge.2000.108716     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Turning to primary care
2. Is primary care essential?
3. Is gatekeeping better than traditional care? A survey of physicians' attitudes
4. Trends in use of barium enema examination, colonoscopy, and sigmoidoscopy: Is use commensurate with risk of disease?
5. Endoscopic demands in the 90's
6. Results from the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/US Food and Drug Administration collaborative study on complication rates and drug use during gastrointestinal endoscopy
7. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies
8. Physician ratings of appropriate indications for six medical and surgical procedures
9. Measuring the necessity of medical procedures
10. The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): Project and methods
11. The European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): Conclusion and WWW site
12. Open access endoscopy: Are the referrals appropriate?
13. The ASGE guidelines for the appropriate use of colonoscopy in an open access system
14. Statistique 1996 des membres de la Federation des medecins suisses
15. Models of excellence
16. Gatekeeping revisited: Protecting patients from overtreatment
17. Appropriateness of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: Comparison of American and Swiss criteria
18. Reliability of panel based guidelines for colonoscopy: An international comparison
19. Variations by speciality in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures
20. Effect of panel composition on appropriateness ratings
21. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: The need for a critical appraisal
22. Dilemmas in rationing health care services: The case for implicit rationing
23. Evidence-based medicine, in its place
24. The ethics of ignorance
25. Toward fewer procedures and better outcomes
26. Some problems in applying evidence in clinical practice
27. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures
28. Overuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a country with open-access endoscopy: A prospective study in primary care
29. Appropriateness: The next frontier
30. Practice guidelines and practicing medicine: Are they compatible?
31. The problem of the inappropriate endoscopy