Effect of GI endoscopy nurse experience on screening colonoscopy outcomes

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 331-343

  Dellon, Evan S ^a   Lippmann, Quinn Kerr ^a   Galanko, Joseph A ^a   Sandler, Robert S ^a   Shaheen, Nicholas J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATROPINE; FLUMAZENIL; NALOXONE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BRADYCARDIA; CECUM; COLONOSCOPY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; DIGESTIVE TRACT INTUBATION; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY; HUMAN; HYPOTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NURSE TRAINING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RESPIRATION DEPRESSION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK FACTOR; SCREENING TEST;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CECUM; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COLONOSCOPY; ENDOSCOPY, GASTROINTESTINAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUBATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651083479     PISSN: 00165107     EISSN: 10976779     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.12.059     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendation and rationale. Ann Intern Med 137 (2002) 129-131
2. Winawer S., Fletcher R., Rex D., et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale: update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124 (2003) 544-560
3. Davila R.E., Rajan E., Baron T.H., et al. ASGE guideline: colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Gastrointest Endosc 63 (2006) 546-557
4. Dominitz J.A., Eisen G.M., Baron T.H., et al. Complications of colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 57 (2003) 441-445
5. Wexner S.D., Garbus J.E., and Singh J.J. A prospective analysis of 13,580 colonoscopies. Reevaluation of credentialing guidelines. Surg Endosc 15 (2001) 251-261
6. Bini E.J., Firoozi B., Choung R.J., et al. Systematic evaluation of complications related to endoscopy in a training setting: a prospective 30-day outcomes study. Gastrointest Endosc 57 (2003) 8-16
7. Nelson D.B., McQuaid K.R., Bond J.H., et al. Procedural success and complications of large-scale screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 55 (2002) 307-314
8. Chak A., Cooper G.S., Blades E.W., et al. Prospective assessment of colonoscopic intubation skills in trainees. Gastrointest Endosc 44 (1996) 54-57
9. Marshall J.B. Technical proficiency of trainees performing colonoscopy: a learning curve. Gastrointest Endosc 42 (1995) 287-291
10. McCashland T., Brand R., Lyden E., et al. The time and financial impact of training fellows in endoscopy. CORI Research Project. Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative. Am J Gastroenterol 95 (2000) 3129-3132
11. Bernstein C., Thorn M., Monsees K., et al. A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 61 (2005) 72-75
12. Harewood G.C. Relationship of colonoscopy completion rates and endoscopist features. Dig Dis Sci 50 (2005) 47-51
13. Cirocco W.C., and Rusin L.C. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 38 (1995) 964-968
14. Dafnis G., Granath F., Pahlman L., et al. Patient factors influencing the completion rate in colonoscopy. Dig Liver Dis 37 (2005) 113-118
15. Anderson J.C., Gonzalez J.D., Messina C.R., et al. Factors that predict incomplete colonoscopy: thinner is not always better. Am J Gastroenterol 95 (2000) 2784-2787
16. Anderson J.C., Messina C.R., Cohn W., et al. Factors predictive of difficult colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 54 (2001) 558-562
17. Aslinia F., Uradomo L., Steele A., et al. Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: an analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital. Am J Gastroenterol 101 (2006) 721-731
18. Kim W.H., Cho Y.J., Park J.Y., et al. Factors affecting insertion time and patient discomfort during colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 52 (2000) 600-605
19. Takahashi Y., Tanaka H., Kinjo M., et al. Prospective evaluation of factors predicting difficulty and pain during sedation-free colonoscopy. Dis Colon Rectum 48 (2005) 1295-1300
20. Walter L.C., de Garmo P., and Covinsky K.E. Association of older age and female sex with inadequate reach of screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Am J Med 116 (2004) 174-178
21. Zuber-Jerger I., and Kullmann F. A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 63 (2006) 358-359
22. SGNA. Standards of clinical nursing practice and role delineation statements. 2005. Available at: http://www.sgna.org/Resources/guidelines/guideline8.cfm. Accessed April 4, 2007.
23. Keats A.S. The ASA classification of physical status: a recapitulation. Anesthesiology 49 (1978) 233-236
24. Verschuur E.M., Kuipers E.J., and Siersema P.D. Nurses working in GI and endoscopic practice: a review. Gastrointest Endosc 65 (2007) 469-479
25. Ganz R.A., Utley D.S., Stern R.A., et al. Complete ablation of esophageal epithelium with a balloon-based bipolar electrode: a phased evaluation in the porcine and in the human esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc 60 (2004) 1002-1010
26. Mathews J.S., Maher K.A., and Cattau Jr. E.L. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography injection training sessions for the gastroenterology nurse and associate. Gastroenterol Nurs 12 (1989) 106-108
27. Ramakrishnan S., Yiannakou J.Y., Ellis W.R., et al. Assessment of patient pain at colonoscopy: are nurses better than endoscopists?. J R Soc Med 97 (2004) 432-433
28. Deenadayalu V.P., Chadalawada V., and Rex D.K. 170 degrees wide-angle colonoscope: effect on efficiency and miss rates. Am J Gastroenterol 99 (2004) 2138-2142
29. Shumaker D.A., Zaman A., and Katon R.M. A randomized controlled trial in a training institution comparing a pediatric variable stiffness colonoscope, a pediatric colonoscope, and an adult colonoscope. Gastrointest Endosc 55 (2002) 172-179
30. Barclay R.L., Vicari J.J., Doughty A.S., et al. Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy. N Engl J Med 355 (2006) 2533-2541
31. Rex D.K., Bond J.H., Winawer S., et al. Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 97 (2002) 1296-1308