Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Clinical Medicine Journal

  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Clinical Medicine Journal

clinmedicine Logo
  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Variations in the reporting of endoscopies by different endoscopists

HL Spencer, AJ Lobo and SA Riley
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-23
Clin Med January 2007
HL Spencer
Chesterfield Royal Hospital, Calow, Chesterfield
Roles: Consultant Physician and Gastroenterologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
AJ Lobo
Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield
Roles: Consultant Physician and Gastroenterologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SA Riley
Northern General Hospital, Sheffield
Roles: Consultant Physician and Gastroenterologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

All gastroscopies and colonoscopies performed in two UK teaching hospitals over a period of one year were audited to investigate whether endoscopic reporting of gastroscopies and colonoscopies by different endoscopists is consistent. Endoscopic diagnoses were retrieved from the hospitals’ endoscopy databases. The results of 1,814 colonoscopies and 2,127 gastroscopies were analysed using χ2 (Chi squared). The frequency of reporting common diagnoses was variable and the differences between specialist endoscopists were highly significant, including for important conditions such as peptic ulceration (range 2–10%, p=0.001) and colonic polyps (16–45%, p<0.0001). There is a large variation in the frequency of the diagnoses reported by different endoscopists. This is unlikely to be explained by casemix or chance. This may have major implications for the health of patients. More emphasis must be placed during training on the correct interpretation of endoscopies.

Key Words
  • colonoscopy
  • diagnosis
  • endoscopy
  • gastroscopy
  • interpretation
  • reporting
  • training
  • © 2007 Royal College of Physicians
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Variations in the reporting of endoscopies by different endoscopists
HL Spencer, AJ Lobo, SA Riley
Clinical Medicine Jan 2007, 7 (1) 23-27; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-23

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Variations in the reporting of endoscopies by different endoscopists
HL Spencer, AJ Lobo, SA Riley
Clinical Medicine Jan 2007, 7 (1) 23-27; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-23
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Vitamin D deficiency–do we follow our own advice?
  • Emergency medical readmission
  • Initial experience with a rapid access blackouts triage clinic
Show more Original Papers

Similar Articles

FAQs

  • Difficulty logging in.

There is currently no login required to access the journals. Please go to the home page and simply click on the edition that you wish to read. If you are still unable to access the content you require, please let us know through the 'Contact us' page.

  • Can't find the CME questionnaire.

The read-only self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ) can be found after the CME section in each edition of Clinical Medicine. RCP members and fellows (using their login details for the main RCP website) are able to access the full SAQ with answers and are awarded 2 CPD points upon successful (8/10) completion from:  https://cme.rcplondon.ac.uk

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home
clinmedicine Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians