Quality Standards in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Can Deep Sedation Influence It?

8Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: According to the guideline published by ESGE/UEG, a high-quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) implies the application of some criteria that enable better healthcare outcomes. Although intra-procedural performance measures are dependent on patient factors, there is no reference to sedation practices in the guideline mentioned above. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether deep sedation influences EGD performance measures established by ESGE/UEG. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study, with a prospective enrollment, that considered for inclusion consecutive patients referred for EGD. Two questionnaires were used to assess performance measures and patient satisfaction after EGD. Results: Sedation had a statistically significant impact on most quality indicators, including complete examination (77.2% without sedation vs. 97.8% with sedation), inspection time (6.17 ± 3.45 vs. 8.39 ± 2.67 min), photodocumentation (78% vs. 97.8%), biopsies (39.3% vs. 60.7%), and patient satisfaction (5.42 ± 2.93 vs. 9.1 ± 1.19). The main reason for an incomplete procedure was patient intolerance (82.6%). Discussion: Deep sedation of patients submitted to EGD proved to be a determinant in the applicability of the ESGE/UEG quality indicators. Patient intolerance was eliminated in the group with sedation, enhancing procedure completeness, adequate pathology identification, management, and consequently, the effectiveness of the exam. Conclusion: Sedation administration should be considered in patients undergoing EGD since it ensures a high-quality procedure.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Correia, C., Almeida, N., Andrade, R., Sant’Anna, M., Macedo, C., Perdigoto, D., … Figueiredo, P. N. (2023). Quality Standards in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Can Deep Sedation Influence It? GE Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology, 31(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1159/000528977

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free