The Use of Databases and Registries to Enhance Colonoscopy Quality

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 717-734

  Logan, Judith R ^a   Lieberman, David A ^b  

^a OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Administrative databases; Clinical registries; Electronic health record

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA BASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE REGISTRY; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAID; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; MEDICARE; OCCULT BLOOD; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; QUALITY CONTROL; RECTOSCOPY; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; VALIDITY;

COLONOSCOPY; DATABASES, FACTUAL; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HUMANS; MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; REGISTRIES;

EID: 77957252580     PISSN: 10525157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.giec.2010.07.007     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user's guide April 2007, (Prepared by Outcome dEcIDE Center [Outcome Sciences, Inc dba Outcome] under Contract No. HHSA29020050035[T01]. AHRQ Publication No. 07-EHC001-1), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (MD), Available at, Accessed January 28, 2010. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov, R.E. Gliklich, N.A. Dreyer (Eds.).
2. LOINC: Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes 2010, Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Available at:, Accessed February 22, 2010. http://loinc.org.
3. Huff S.M., Rocha R.A., McDonald C.J., et al. Development of the Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) vocabulary. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998, 5:276.
4. Khan A.N., Griffith S.P., Moore C., et al. Standardizing laboratory data by mapping to LOINC. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006, 13:353.
5. Davila J.A., El-Serag H.B. GI Epidemiology: databases for epidemiological studies. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007, 25:169.
6. The burden of digestive diseases in the United States. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases 2008, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, NIH Publication No. 09-6443. J.E. Everhart (Ed.).
7. Richter J.E. The enormous burden of digestive diseases on our healthcare system. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2003, 5:93.
8. Sandler R.S., Everhart J.E., Donowitz M., et al. The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 2002, 122:1500.
9. Shaheen N.J., Hansen R.A., Morgan D.R., et al. The burden of gastrointestinal and liver diseases, 2006. Am J Gastroenterol 2006, 101:2128.
10. National Healthcare Quality Report 2008 March 2009, AHRQ Publication No. 07-EHC001-1, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (MD), Available at, Accessed February 14, 2010. http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/nhqr08/nhqr08.pdf.
11. NQF-Endorsed Standards. The National Quality Forum Available at:, Accessed February 25, 2010. http://www.qualityforum.org/Measures_List.aspx.
12. Clancy C. The performance of performance measurement. Health Serv Res 2007, 42:1797.
13. Black C., Roos N.P. Administrative data. Baby or bathwater?. Med Care 1998, 36:3.
14. Iezzoni L.I. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:666.
15. Iezzoni L.I. Finally present on admission but needs attention. Med Care 2007, 45:280.
16. Mohammed M.A., Stevens A. The value of administrative databases. BMJ 2007, 334:1014.
17. Jollis J.G., Ancukiewicz M., DeLong E.R., et al. Discordance of databases designed for claims payment versus clinical information systems. Implications for outcomes research. Ann Intern Med 1993, 119:844.
18. Keating N.L., Landrum M.B., Landon B.E., et al. Measuring the quality of diabetes care using administrative data: is there bias?. Health Serv Res 2003, 38:1529.
19. Solberg L.I., Engebretson K.I., Sperl-Hillen J.M., et al. Are claims data accurate enough to identify patients for performance measures or quality improvement? The case of diabetes, heart disease, and depression. Am J Med Qual 2006, 21:238.
20. Davenport D.L., Holsapple C.W., Conigliaro J. Assessing surgical quality using administrative and clinical data sets: a direct comparison of the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Database and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set. Am J Med Qual 2009, 24:395.
21. University HealthSystem Consortium University HealthSystem Consortium. 2010 Available at:, Accessed March 6, 2010. https://www.uhc.edu./.
22. About ACS NSQIP American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program 2006. Available at:, Accessed March 6, 2010. https://acsnsqip.org/main/about_overview.asp.
23. Baxter N.N., Goldwasser M.A., Paszat L.F., et al. Association of Colonoscopy and Death from Colorectal Cancer. Ann Intern Med 2009, 150:1-8.
24. Winawer S.J., Zauber A.G., Ho M.N., et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med 1993, 329:1977.
25. Physicians Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Available at:, Accessed March 6, 2010. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/pqrip.
26. Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (PCPI) American Medical Association 2010. Available at:, Accessed March 6, 2010. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/clinical-practice-improvement/clinical-quality/physician-consortium-performanace-improvement.shtml.
27. Jamtvedt G., Young J.M., Kristoffersen D.T., et al. Does telling people what they have been doing change what they do? A systematic review of the effects of audit and feedback. Qual Saf Health Care 2006, 15:433-436.
28. Walsh J.M.E., McDonald K.M., Shojania K.G., et al. Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management: a systematic review. Med Care 2006, 44(7):646-657.
29. Chaillet N., Dubé E., Dugas M., et al. Evidence-based strategies for implementing guidelines in obstetrics: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 108:1234-1245.
30. Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act), Title XIII of Division A and Title IV of Division B of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, (ARRA) Section 4101, Pub Law No. 111-5, (2009).
31. Arts D.G., De Keizer N.F., Scheffer G.J. Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2002, 9:600.
32. Black N., Payne M. Directory of clinical databases: improving and promoting their use. Qual Saf Health Care 2003, 12:348.
33. Black N., Barker M., Payne M. Cross sectional survey of multicentre clinical databases in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2004, 328:1478.
34. Ferguson T.B., Dziuban S.W., Edwards F.H., et al. The STS National Database: current changes and challenges for the new millennium. Committee to Establish a National Database in Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann Thorac Surg 2000, 69:680.
35. O'Brien S.M., Shahian D.M., DeLong E.R., et al. Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: part 2-Statistical considerations in composite measure scoring and provider rating. Ann Thorac Surg 2007, 83:S13.
36. Shahian D.M., Edwards F.H., Ferraris V.A., et al. Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: part 1-Conceptual framework and measure selection. Ann Thorac Surg 2007, 83:S3.
37. Shahian D.M., O'Brien S.M., Normand S.L., et al. Association of hospital coronary artery bypass volume with processes of care, mortality, morbidity, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons composite quality score. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010, 139:273.
38. GI Quality Improvement Project Description. GI Quality Improvement Consortium, Ltd Available at:, Accessed March 6, 2010. http://www.giquic.org/description.asp.
39. Einbinder J.S., Scully K. Using a clinical data repository to estimate the frequency and costs of adverse drug events. Proc AMIA Symp 2001, 154.
40. McDonald C.J., Overhage J.M., Dexter P., et al. A framework for capturing clinical data sets from computerized sources. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:675.
41. Owen R.R., Thrush C.R., Cannon D., et al. Use of electronic medical record data for quality improvement in schizophrenia treatment. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004, 11:351.
42. Tang P.C., Ralston M., Arrigotti M.F., et al. Comparison of methodologies for calculating quality measures based on administrative data versus clinical data from an electronic health record system: implications for performance measures. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007, 14:10.
43. Linder J.A., Kaleba E.O., Kmetik K.S. Using electronic health records to measure physician performance for acute conditions in primary care: empirical evaluation of the community-acquired pneumonia clinical quality measure set. Med Care 2009, 47:208.
44. Baker D.W., Persell S.D., Thompson J.A., et al. Automated review of electronic health records to assess quality of care for outpatients with heart failure. Ann Intern Med 2007, 146:270.
45. Persell S.D., Wright J.M., Thompson J.A., et al. Assessing the validity of national quality measures for coronary artery disease using an electronic health record. Arch Intern Med 2006, 166:2272.
46. O'Toole M.F., Kmetik K.S., Bossley H., et al. Electronic health record systems: the vehicle for implementing performance measures. Am Heart Hosp J 2005, 3:88.
47. Goulet J.L., Erdos J., Kancir S., et al. Measuring performance directly using the veterans health administration electronic medical record: a comparison with external peer review. Med Care 2007, 45:73.
48. Persell S.D., Kho A.N., Thompson J.A., et al. Improving hypertension quality measurement using electronic health records. Med Care 2009, 47:388.
49. Lieberman D.A., Faigel D.O., Logan J.R., et al. Assessment of the quality of colonoscopy reports: results from a multicenter consortium. Gastrointest Endosc 2009, 69:645.
50. Sonnenberg A., Amorosi S.L., Lacey M.J., et al. Patterns of endoscopy in the United States: analysis of data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the National Endoscopic Database. Gastrointest Endosc 2008, 67:489.
51. Lieberman D., Nadel M., Smith R.A., et al. Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable. Gastrointest Endosc 2007, 65:757.
52. 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 2002, 97:1296.
53. Hripcsak G., Friedman C., Alderson P.O., et al. Unlocking clinical data from narrative reports: a study of natural language processing. Ann Intern Med 1995, 122:681.
54. Hazlehurst B., Naleway A., Mullooly J. Detecting possible vaccine adverse events in clinical notes of the electronic medical record. Vaccine 2009, 27:2077.
55. D'Avolio L.W., Litwin M.S., Rogers S.O., et al. Facilitating Clinical Outcomes Assessment through the automated identification of quality measures for prostate cancer surgery. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008, 15:341.
56. Dokholyan R.S., Muhlbaier L.H., Falletta J.M., et al. Regulatory and ethical considerations for linking clinical and administrative databases. Am Heart J 2009, 157:971.
57. The Decade of Health Information Technology: delivering consumer-centric and information-rich health care. Framework for Strategic Action. Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of Health and Human Services and David G. Brailer, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. July 21, 2004.
58. Atreja A., Achkar J.P., Jain A.K., et al. Using technology to promote gastrointestinal outcomes research: a case for electronic health records. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:2171.