Portuguese
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 1995-Nov

The ASGE guidelines for the appropriate use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in an open access system.

Apenas usuários registrados podem traduzir artigos
Entrar Inscrever-se
O link é salvo na área de transferência
G Minoli
A Prada
G Gambetta
A Formenti
R Schalling
L Lai
A Pera

Palavras-chave

Resumo

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter and prospective study was aimed at examining the appropriate use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in an open access system (primary endoscopy) using the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. We also wished to see whether these guidelines can be easily used in clinical practice.

METHODS

Three thousand four hundred fourteen upper gastrointestinal endoscopies performed in seven endoscopy units of different size were studied prospectively. The real indication, to be with the guidelines, was determined by the endoscopist before performing the examination, based on a patient's history.

RESULTS

Seven hundred eighty-one (23%) endoscopies were "generally not indicated," according to ASGE guidelines, and were distributed as follows: follow-up of duodenal ulcer healing (33%), follow-up of other healed benign diseases (24%), surveillance of gastric atrophy, pernicious anemia, metaplasia, treated achalasia, and prior gastric intervention (14%), diagnosis of dyspepsia considered functional in origin (13%), and uncomplicated heartburn responding to medical therapy (7%). Endoscopies "generally not indicated" accounted for 23% in the bigger endoscopy units, 24% in the average sized units, and 22% in the smaller ones. They accounted for 32% when the examination was prescribed by family doctors, 17% when prescribed by internists, 19% by surgeons, and 14% by gastroenterologists (p < 0.001). Eighty-six (2.5%) endoscopies were done for indications not provided in the guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that ASGE guidelines are complete and easy to use and that the rate of inappropriate indications in an open access system can be considerable. They occurred mainly in the follow-up of healed benign disease and were more frequent when the examination was prescribed by the family doctor.

Junte-se à nossa
página do facebook

O mais completo banco de dados de ervas medicinais apoiado pela ciência

  • Funciona em 55 idiomas
  • Curas herbais apoiadas pela ciência
  • Reconhecimento de ervas por imagem
  • Mapa GPS interativo - marcar ervas no local (em breve)
  • Leia publicações científicas relacionadas à sua pesquisa
  • Pesquise ervas medicinais por seus efeitos
  • Organize seus interesses e mantenha-se atualizado com as notícias de pesquisa, testes clínicos e patentes

Digite um sintoma ou doença e leia sobre ervas que podem ajudar, digite uma erva e veja as doenças e sintomas contra os quais ela é usada.
* Todas as informações são baseadas em pesquisas científicas publicadas

Google Play badgeApp Store badge