Table 1.
Quality indicator | Grade of recommendation |
---|---|
Pre-procedure | |
Appropriate indication | 1C+ |
Informed consent including discussion of risks | 3 |
Use of post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection surveillance intervals | 1A |
Use of IBD disease surveillance intervals | 2C |
Documentation of quality of bowel preparation in note | 2C |
Intra-procedure | |
Cecal intubation rates including photo documentation of landmark in note | 1C |
Adenoma detection during screening | 1C |
Withdrawal time: mean >6 minutes in normals exams | 2C |
Biopsy specimens in patients with chronic diarrhea | 2C |
Number and distribution of biopsy specimens in IBD surveillance | 1C |
Endoscopic resection attempted for pedunculated polyps and sessile polyps <2 cm | 3 |
Post-procedure | |
Incidence of perforation | 2C |
Incidence of post-polypectomy bleeding | 2C |
Pot-polypectomy bleeding managed non-operatively | 1C |
Adapted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: American Journal of Gastroenterology (Rex DK, Petrini JL, Baron TH, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:873–85), copyright 2006.
1A = Strong: clear benefit, supported by randomized trials without important limitations
1C+ =Strong: clear benefit, supported by overwhelming evidence from observational studies
1C = Intermediate: clear benefit, supported by observational studies
2C = Very weak: unclear benefit, supported by observational studies
3 = Weak: unclear benefit, expert opinion only