Copyright
©2012 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 21, 2012; 18(27): 3551-3557
Published online Jul 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i27.3551
Published online Jul 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i27.3551
Patient demographics and history |
Age |
Sex |
MRN |
Management plans |
Informed consent documentation |
Previous GI procedures: documented date (yes/no) |
Documentation of ASA classification |
Indications for procedure |
Average risk |
Increased risk |
Incomplete colonoscopy |
Post adenoma resection |
Procedure: Technical description |
Date and time |
Sedation |
Level of difficulty of the procedure |
Bowel preparation |
Type and dosage |
Quality |
Actual extent of examination |
Cecal intubation (yes/no) |
Documentation of cecal landmarks |
Appendiceal orifice |
Ileocecal valve |
Total and withdrawal time recorded (yes/no) |
Colonoscopic findings |
Colonic polyp(s): |
Number |
Size |
Morphology |
Morphology anatomic location |
Method of removal |
Completeness of removal (yes/no) |
Retrieved (yes/no) |
Sent to pathology (yes/no) |
Interventions/unplanned events |
Unplanned interventions and complications |
Documentation of discharge plans (info to patient, info to referring MD) |
Pathology |
Documentation of pathology results to the patient and the physician |
Adenoma detection (yes/no) |
Cancer detection (yes/no) |
- Citation: Beaulieu D, Barkun A, Martel M. Quality audit of colonoscopy reports amongst patients screened or surveilled for colorectal neoplasia. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18(27): 3551-3557
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v18/i27/3551.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i27.3551