Endoscopy Quality Indicators, Version # V 0.3 dated 14.12.20

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Identifying procedure adjusted quality indicators for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy from multivariable analysis of cohorts with post endoscopy upper gastrointestinal cancer (POUGIC) in the national endoscopy database (NED)

  • IRAS ID

    289695

  • Contact name

    Nigel Trudgill

  • Contact email

    nigel.trudgill@nhs.net

  • Sponsor organisation

    Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 11 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    Aims
    We want to see how accurate endoscopy (flexible telescope examination of the gullet and stomach) is in finding cancer and to find measures of endoscopy performance that help to reduce the risk of not finding signs of a cancer at endoscopy.
    Background
    16,800 people in the UK are diagnosed with oesophageal (gullet) or stomach cancer each year. Their outlook is often poor. 10% of people may have had an endoscopy that did not find their cancer in the three years before their diagnosis.There are no reliable measures of endoscopy quality to help reduce this risk and improve cancer diagnosis.
    Design and methods
    For the first time, using national records of all endoscopies in each hospital and of all people with oesophageal, stomach and duodenal (first part of small bowel)cancer, we will find out how many people had an endoscopy that did not find their cancer at each hospital, compared with other hospitals. We will then look for differences in endoscopy quality measures in the National Endoscopy Database records of all endoscopies undertaken within the UK, comparing hospitals with the lowest (best) missed cancer rates with hospitals with the highest (worst) rates.This will allow us to identify evidence based endoscopy quality measures that we can use to improve endoscopy standards and reduce the risk of patients having endoscopies that do not diagnose their cancer.

  • REC name

    London - South East Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    20/PR/1003

  • Date of REC Opinion

    19 Jan 2021

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion