Gastroenterologists overestimate the appropriateness of colonoscopies they perform: An international observational study

Endoscopy

Volumn 37, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 840-846

  Vader, John Paul ^a   Wietlisbach, V ^a   Harris, J K ^a   Burnand, B ^a   Froehlich, F ^b   Gonvers, J J ^b   Afonso Debourse, J ^c   Audigier, J C ^c   Barthelemy C ^c   Benoni, C ^c   Bures, J ^c   Bytzer, P ^c   Chaussade, S ^c   Deinert, K ^c   D'Inca R ^c   Dumas, O ^c   Eckardt, V F ^c   Fork, F T ^c   Fried, R ^c   Gaudric, M ^c   Gianni, S ^c   Gnauck, R ^c   Gyrtrup, H J ^c   Hansen, J M ^c   Hilsden, R J ^c   Hoch, J ^c   Keil, R ^c   Kohut, M ^c   Le Corguille M ^c   Matzen, P ^c   Meucci, G ^c   Minoli, G ^c   Moayyedi, P ^c   Neuhaus, H ^c   Nowak, A ^c   O'Mahony, S ^c   Payeras, G ^c   Piqueras, J P ^c   Rey, J P ^c   Rey, J F ^c   Rejchrt, S ^c   Ridpath, J ^c   Romanczyk, T ^c   Saez, M A ^c   Sahm, S ^c   Sato, S ^c   Saunders, B ^c   Schmidt, P ^c   Schumacher, B ^c   Schwarz, J ^c   Siroky, M ^c   Sturniolo, G C ^c   Swain, D ^c   Toth, E ^c   Vance, M ^c   more..

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

^b POLICLINIQUE MÉDICALE UNIVERSITAIRE   (Switzerland)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLONOSCOPY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASE; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; GROUPS BY AGE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATIENT REFERRAL; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RATING SCALE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COLONOSCOPY; FEMALE; GASTROENTEROLOGY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED;

EID: 24644467267     PISSN: 0013726X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-870193     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1986; 2: 53-63
2. Park RE, Fink A, Brook RH et al. Physician ratings of appropriate indications for six medical and surgical procedures. Am J Public Health 1986; 76: 766-772
3. Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ, Leape LL et al. Measuring the necessity of medical procedures. Med Care 1994; 32: 357-365
4. Kahn KL, Kosecoff J, Chassin MR et al. The use and misuse of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Ann Intern Med 1988; 109: 664-670
5. Vader JP, Porchet F, Larequi-Lauber T et al. Appropriateness of surgery for sciatica: reliability of guidelines from expert panels. Spine 2000; 25: 1831-1836
6. Vader JP, Burnand B, Froehlich F et al. The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): project and methods. Endoscopy 1999; 31: 572-578
7. Bernstein SJ, Lazaro P, Fitch K et al. Effect of specialty and nationality on panel judgments of appropriateness of coronary revascularization: a pilot study. Med Care 2001; 39: 513-520
8. Campbell SM, Hann M, Roland MO et al. The effect of panel membership and feedback on ratings in a two-round Delphi survey: results of a randomized controlled trial. Med Care 1999; 37: 964-968
9. Herrin J, Etchason JA, Kahan JP et al. Effect of panel composition on physician ratings of appropriateness of abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: elucidating differences between multispecialty panel results and specialty society recommendations. Health Policy 1997; 42: 67-81
10. Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape LL et al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care 1996; 34: 512-523
11. Landrum MB, McNeil BG, Silva L et al. Understanding variability in physician ratings of the appropriateness of coronary angiography after acute myocardial infarction. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 309-319
12. Tobacman JK, Scott IU, Cyphert S et al. Reproducibility of measures of overuse of cataract surgery by three physician panels. Med Care 1999; 37: 937-945
13. Ayanian JZ, Landrum MB, Normand SL et al. Rating the appropriateness of coronary angiography: do practicing physicians agree with an expert panel and with each other? N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 1896-1904
14. Nicollier-Fahrni A, Vader JP, Froehlich F et al. Development of appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy: comparison between a standardized expert panel and an evidence-based medicine approach. Int J Qual Health Care 2003; 15: 15-22
15. Kmieciak Le Corguillé M, Gaudric M, Sogni P et al. Pertinence des indications de la coloscopie dans un service de gastroentérologie de l'AP-HP en 2001 [full text in English on www.e2med.com/gcb]. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 2003; 27: 213-218
16. Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care. Colorectal cancer screening. CMAJ 2001; 165: 206-208
17. Finnish Medical Society Duodecim. Prevention and screening of colorectal cancer. In: EBM Guidelines. Evidence-Based Medicine (CD-ROM) Helsinki, Finland: Duodecim Medical Publications Ltd, 2004
18. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137: 129-131
19. Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale - update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 544-560
20. Shekelle PG, Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ et al. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 1888-1895
21. Redelmeier DA, Tversky A. Discrepancy between medical decisions for individual patients and for groups. N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 1162-1164
22. Wassertheil-Smoller S, Tobin J, Steingart R et al. Assessing the appropriateness of medical care [letter]. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 1478-1481
23. Naylor CD. What is appropriate care [editorial]? N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 1918-1920
24. Burnand B, Vader JP, Froehlich F et al. Reliability of panel based guidelines for colonoscopy: an international comparison. Gastrointest Endosc 1998; 47: 162-166
25. Hemingway H, Crook AM, Feder G et al. Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 645-654