Table 3.

CAG Consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy.

Statement	Addressed in GRS-C yes/no? (SC)
(1) Informed consent	Yes
(2) Adoption of universal standards	Yes
(3) Appropriateness	Yes
(4) Technical and personnel resources	Yes
(5) Preprocedure information	Yes
(6) Intraprocedural policies to be implemented	Yes (refers to CAG auditable outcomes but does not specifically ask about each)
(7) Adherence to appropriate discharge policies	Yes (addressed but does not suggest need for documentation of standard discharge readiness score)
(8) Follow-up policy in place	Yes
(9) Provision of written discharge information	Yes (NB: does not include discussion of worrisome sx to watch for)
(10) Existence of formal QI program at facility	Yes
(11) Existence of a formal quality review committee	Yes
(12) Regular review of quality indicators with action plan	Yes
(13) Regular review of safety indicators with action plan	Yes
(14) Presence of education programs for staff	No
(15) Appropriate monitoring and evaluation of trainees	No
(16) Ensured competency of all trainees and staff (required documentation of procedures performed, direct observation)	No
(17) Regular review of individual practice/outcome data	Yes
(18) Privileges granted based on formal evaluation	No
(19) Privileges subject to formal regular review based on documented competence	No
(20) Standardized electronic endoscopic procedures	Yes
(21) Policies in place to ensure timeliness/completeness of procedure reporting	Yes
(22) Patient centered service	Yes
(23) Patient feedback and responsive action	Yes