DSpace Repository

Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross sectional study from Sri Lanka

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Samarakoon, Y
dc.contributor.author Gunawardana, N
dc.contributor.author Pathirana, A
dc.contributor.author Hewage, S
dc.date.accessioned 2020-01-08T04:34:52Z
dc.date.available 2020-01-08T04:34:52Z
dc.date.issued 2018
dc.identifier.citation Samarakoon, Y, et al.(2018)." Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross sectional study from Sri Lanka", BMC Gastroenterology (2018) 18:72 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://dr.lib.sjp.ac.lk/handle/123456789/8695
dc.description.abstract Background: Due to finite resources, the clinical decision to subject a patient to colonoscopy needs to be based on the evidence, regardless of its availability, affordability and safety. This study assessed the appropriateness of colonoscopies conducted in selected study settings in Sri Lanka. In the absence of local guidelines, audit was based on European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy II (EPAGE II) criteria. Methods: This cross-sectional study assessed consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy between June to August 2015 at four main hospitals in Sri Lanka. Interviewer administered questionnaire and secondary data were collected by trained health staff. Indications were assessed according to EPAGE II criteria. Results: Out of 325 patients, male female proportions were 57.2 and 42.8%. Mean (SD) age was 54.9 (12.1) years. Colonoscopies were appropriate in 61.2% (95% CI 55.8–66.3), uncertain in 28.6% (95% CI 23.9–33.7) and inappropriate in 10.2% (95% CI 7.3–13.9). Colonoscopy to evaluate abdominal pain has highest percentage of inappropriateness of 10.0%. However, 9.5% of these colonoscopies revealed Colo-Rectal Cancer (CRC), reflecting differences in the profile of local CRC patients. Colonoscopies with appropriate or uncertain indications are three times more likely to have a relevant finding than inappropriate indications (42.5% vs. 18.2%; OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.33–8.3; P = 0.008). Conclusions: Majority of colonoscopies are appropriate. However, it cannot be neglected that every one in ten patients undergo inappropriate colonoscopy. Proportion of inappropriateness was highest for the indication of chronic abdominal pain, of which, 9.5% of patients were diagnosed with CRC. This may reflect the different profile of local CRC patients in terms of symptom manifestation and other characteristics. In conclusion, the authors recommend formulation of national guidelines for colonoscopy indications based on current best evidence and local patient profile. Use of such prepared local guidelines will improve the efficient use of finite resources. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.title Appropriateness of colonoscopy according to EPAGE II in a low resource setting: a cross sectional study from Sri Lanka en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.identifier.doi 10.1186/s12876-018-0798-7 en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Browse

My Account