What are the priority quality indicators for colonoscopy in real‐world clinical practice?

Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator‐dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inDigestive endoscopy Vol. 36; no. 1; pp. 30 - 39
Main Authors Tiankanon, Kasenee, Aniwan, Satimai
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Australia 01.01.2024
Subjects
Adenoma - diagnosis
Cecum
colon cancer
colon cancer screening
colonoscopy
Colonoscopy - methods
Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis
Colorectal Neoplasms - epidemiology
Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control
Early Detection of Cancer - methods
Humans
indicator
quality
Quality Indicators, Health Care
indicator
colonoscopy
colon cancer
colon cancer screening
quality
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Abstract Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator‐dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high‐quality screening colonoscopy in real‐world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit‐based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow‐up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high‐quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.
AbstractList Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator-dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high-quality screening colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit-based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow-up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high-quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.
Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator-dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high-quality screening colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit-based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow-up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high-quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of CRC. However, colonoscopy is an operator-dependent procedure, and endoscopists' quality performance varies widely. This article reviewed the priority metrics and practices that contribute to high-quality screening colonoscopy in real-world clinical practice. With growing evidence, quality indicators have been subject to intense research and associated with reducing postcolonoscopy CRC incidence and mortality. Some quality metrics can reflect an endoscopy unit-based practice (i.e. quality of bowel preparation and withdrawal time). Other quality indicators primarily reflect individuals' skill and knowledge (i.e. cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate, and appropriately assigned follow-up colonoscopy interval). Measurement and improvement of priority quality indicators for colonoscopy should be made at both the endoscopist and unit levels. Substantial evidence supports the impact of high-quality colonoscopy in reducing the incidence of postcolonoscopy CRC.
Author Aniwan, Satimai
Tiankanon, Kasenee
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Kasenee
  surname: Tiankanon
  fullname: Tiankanon, Kasenee
  organization: Chulalongkorn University
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Satimai
  surname: Aniwan
  fullname: Aniwan, Satimai
  email: satimai@gmail.com
  organization: Chulalongkorn University
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37422906$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNp1kMtKAzEUhoMotl4WvoDMUhdTJ5NLZ1Yi9QpFN4oLF-FMkqGRdFKTFOnOR_AZfRJT225Eszlw8v0_nG8PbXeu0wgd4WKA0ztTuhtgygnbQn1MKckx53gb9Ysas5ylfQ_thfBaFLisKd1FPTKkZVkXvI9enicQM_A6ixOdzbxx3sRF9jYHu5ymU0ZCdD5krfOZdNZ1Lkg3W35lXoP9-vh8d96qTFrTJdamEpDRSH1-gHZasEEfruc-erq-ehzd5uOHm7vRxTiXhNYs1wBEFkzVLeVVDWooFS2xbBupWFs0bdOUQFhblYpzArypFKnTCjDBFZSkJvvoZNU78-5trkMUUxOkthY67eZBlBVlnCUvVUKP1-i8mWol0sFT8AuxEZKAsxUgvQvB61ZIEyEa10UPxgpciKVykZSLH-UpcforsSn9i123vxurF_-D4vLqfpX4Bq-KkkU
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_12677_ACM_2024_142371
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_giec_2024_10_008
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_tige_2024_03_001
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_gie_2024_11_042
Cites_doi 10.3109/00365521.2016.1157892
10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005
10.1016/S0016-5107(00)70383-X
10.1056/NEJMoa1300720
10.1053/j.gastro.2022.11.031
10.5946/ce.2022.037
10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.030
10.1136/gut.2010.229534
10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.014
10.1093/gastro/goad009
10.7326/M19-2477
10.1016/j.cgh.2021.12.037
10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012
10.1055/s-0043-103411
10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.053
10.1056/NEJM200007203430301
10.1055/s-0035-1569674
10.5946/ce.2012.45.4.404
10.1038/ajg.2010.51
10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02776-2
10.1056/NEJMoa0907667
10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.058
10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300651
10.1111/jgh.14674
10.1016/j.gie.2013.10.013
10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310685
10.1155/2019/7476023
10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.044
10.1056/NEJMoa1100370
10.14309/ajg.0000000000002055
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05812.x
10.1053/j.gastro.2015.06.044
10.1111/1751-2980.12343
10.1111/den.14432
10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.014
10.1053/j.gastro.2018.05.038
10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.004
10.1186/s12876-019-1111-0
10.1038/ajg.2010.247
10.1016/j.gie.2017.12.027
10.1007/s10151-022-02642-9
10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300295
10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002
10.14309/ajg.0000000000000622
10.1038/ajg.2014.171
10.1056/NEJMoa1309086
10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.031
10.5009/gnl20166
10.1001/jama.1988.03410120089033
10.1055/a-0956-1889
10.1016/j.medcli.2017.04.015
10.1053/j.gastro.2010.09.006
10.15403/jgld-4027
10.1038/ctg.2015.5
10.1002/jgh3.12084
10.1067/mge.2002.121883
10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.006
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00494.x
10.1016/j.gie.2011.06.032
10.1056/NEJMoa055498
10.4251/wjgo.v8.i12.826
10.1016/j.gie.2018.09.028
10.1016/j.gie.2010.06.068
10.1038/ajg.2015.440
10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02461-7
10.1001/jama.2022.6644
10.1055/a-1201-0226
10.1016/j.gtc.2013.05.005
10.1093/intqhc/13.6.475
10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057
10.1097/MCG.0000000000001813
10.1038/ajg.2015.417
10.1007/s10198-021-01333-w
10.1053/j.gastro.2021.05.041
10.1055/s-0032-1326186
10.1111/jgh.15701
10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059
10.1007/s00384-021-04062-x
10.1016/j.gie.2011.03.003
10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327736
10.1097/MEG.0000000000002259
10.1053/j.gastro.2015.09.041
10.1016/j.gie.2018.06.028
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2023 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.
Copyright_xml – notice: 2023 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1111/den.14635
DatabaseName CrossRef
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic

CrossRef
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1443-1661
EndPage 39
ExternalDocumentID 37422906
10_1111_den_14635
DEN14635
Genre reviewArticle
Journal Article
Review
GroupedDBID ---
.3N
.GA
.Y3
05W
0R~
10A
1OB
1OC
29G
31~
33P
3SF
4.4
50Y
50Z
51W
51X
52M
52N
52O
52P
52R
52S
52T
52U
52V
52W
52X
53G
5GY
5HH
5LA
5VS
66C
702
7PT
8-0
8-1
8-3
8-4
8-5
8UM
930
A01
A03
AAESR
AAEVG
AAHHS
AAHQN
AAIPD
AAMNL
AANHP
AANLZ
AAONW
AASGY
AAXRX
AAYCA
AAZKR
ABCQN
ABCUV
ABDBF
ABEML
ABJNI
ABPVW
ABQWH
ABXGK
ACAHQ
ACBWZ
ACCFJ
ACCZN
ACGFS
ACGOF
ACMXC
ACPOU
ACRPL
ACSCC
ACUHS
ACXBN
ACXQS
ACYXJ
ADBBV
ADBTR
ADEOM
ADIZJ
ADKYN
ADMGS
ADNMO
ADOZA
ADXAS
ADZMN
ADZOD
AEEZP
AEIGN
AEIMD
AENEX
AEQDE
AEUQT
AEUYR
AFBPY
AFEBI
AFFPM
AFGKR
AFPWT
AFWVQ
AFZJQ
AHBTC
AHEFC
AIACR
AITYG
AIURR
AIWBW
AJBDE
ALAGY
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALUQN
ALVPJ
AMBMR
AMYDB
ASPBG
ATUGU
AVWKF
AZBYB
AZFZN
AZVAB
BAFTC
BDRZF
BFHJK
BHBCM
BMXJE
BROTX
BRXPI
BY8
C45
CAG
COF
CS3
D-6
D-7
D-E
D-F
DCZOG
DPXWK
DR2
DRFUL
DRMAN
DRSTM
DTERQ
DU5
EAD
EAP
EBD
EBS
EJD
EMK
EMOBN
ESX
EX3
F00
F01
F04
F5P
FEDTE
FUBAC
FZ0
G-S
G.N
GODZA
H.X
HF~
HGLYW
HVGLF
HZI
HZ~
IHE
IX1
J0M
K48
KBYEO
LATKE
LC2
LC3
LEEKS
LH4
LITHE
LOXES
LP6
LP7
LUTES
LW6
LYRES
MEWTI
MK4
MRFUL
MRMAN
MRSTM
MSFUL
MSMAN
MSSTM
MXFUL
MXMAN
MXSTM
N04
N05
N9A
NF~
O66
O9-
OIG
OVD
P2P
P2W
P2X
P2Z
P4B
P4D
PALCI
Q.N
Q11
QB0
R.K
RIWAO
RJQFR
ROL
RX1
SAMSI
SUPJJ
SV3
TEORI
TUS
UB1
W8V
W99
WBKPD
WHWMO
WIH
WIJ
WIK
WOHZO
WOW
WQJ
WRC
WUP
WVDHM
WXI
WXSBR
XG1
YFH
ZZTAW
~IA
~WT
AAYXX
AEYWJ
AGHNM
AGQPQ
AGYGG
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
AAMMB
AEFGJ
AGXDD
AIDQK
AIDYY
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c3495-eaa3c05d9f4689ad7cd421cfbcd5f0bfbb2a35f82d663a6b8d39b2aa1318a2393
IEDL.DBID DR2
ISSN 0915-5635
1443-1661
IngestDate Thu Jul 10 22:46:18 EDT 2025
Wed Feb 19 02:10:44 EST 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:06:03 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 00:42:26 EDT 2025
Wed Jan 22 16:19:00 EST 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords indicator
colonoscopy
colon cancer
colon cancer screening
quality
Language English
License 2023 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3495-eaa3c05d9f4689ad7cd421cfbcd5f0bfbb2a35f82d663a6b8d39b2aa1318a2393
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
PMID 37422906
PQID 2845654438
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 39
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_2845654438
pubmed_primary_37422906
crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_den_14635
crossref_primary_10_1111_den_14635
wiley_primary_10_1111_den_14635_DEN14635
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate January 2024
2024-01-00
2024-Jan
20240101
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2024-01-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 01
  year: 2024
  text: January 2024
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace Australia
PublicationPlace_xml – name: Australia
PublicationTitle Digestive endoscopy
PublicationTitleAlternate Dig Endosc
PublicationYear 2024
References 2012; 61
2017; 85
2019; 2019
2023; 35
2019; 51
2012; 366
2021; 22
2002; 97
2015; 149
2010; 105
2017; 49
2013; 369
2011; 60
2002; 55
2000; 51
2019; 19
2021; 161
2014; 370
2022; 20
2017; 153
2005; 61
2018; 88
2018; 87
2021; 36
2022; 164
2018; 2
2021; 33
2020; 173
1988; 260
2015; 82
2015; 81
2023; 27
2020; 91
2016; 111
2019; 157
2022; 37
2022; 31
2001; 13
2016; 48
2022; 327
2023; 72
2010; 72
2016; 150
2023; 97
2009; 69
2015; 6
2023; 11
2013; 45
2017; 66
2019; 34
2013; 42
2011; 74
2010; 362
2016; 51
2016; 17
2021; 93
2022; 118
2016; 14
2012; 75
2006; 355
2018; 155
2021; 15
2021; 53
2014; 109
2018; 150
2022
2019; 89
2020; 115
2014; 79
2022; 55
2000; 343
2011; 140
2012; 45
2014; 147
2006; 101
2016; 8
e_1_2_11_70_1
e_1_2_11_72_1
e_1_2_11_32_1
e_1_2_11_55_1
e_1_2_11_78_1
e_1_2_11_30_1
e_1_2_11_57_1
e_1_2_11_36_1
e_1_2_11_51_1
e_1_2_11_74_1
e_1_2_11_13_1
e_1_2_11_34_1
e_1_2_11_53_1
e_1_2_11_76_1
e_1_2_11_11_1
e_1_2_11_29_1
e_1_2_11_6_1
e_1_2_11_27_1
e_1_2_11_4_1
e_1_2_11_48_1
e_1_2_11_2_1
Shimoda R (e_1_2_11_81_1) 2017; 49
e_1_2_11_83_1
e_1_2_11_60_1
e_1_2_11_20_1
e_1_2_11_45_1
e_1_2_11_66_1
e_1_2_11_47_1
e_1_2_11_68_1
e_1_2_11_24_1
e_1_2_11_41_1
e_1_2_11_62_1
e_1_2_11_8_1
e_1_2_11_22_1
e_1_2_11_43_1
e_1_2_11_64_1
e_1_2_11_85_1
e_1_2_11_17_1
e_1_2_11_15_1
e_1_2_11_59_1
e_1_2_11_38_1
e_1_2_11_19_1
e_1_2_11_50_1
e_1_2_11_71_1
e_1_2_11_10_1
e_1_2_11_31_1
e_1_2_11_56_1
e_1_2_11_77_1
e_1_2_11_58_1
e_1_2_11_79_1
e_1_2_11_14_1
e_1_2_11_35_1
e_1_2_11_52_1
e_1_2_11_73_1
e_1_2_11_12_1
e_1_2_11_33_1
e_1_2_11_54_1
e_1_2_11_75_1
e_1_2_11_7_1
e_1_2_11_28_1
e_1_2_11_5_1
e_1_2_11_26_1
e_1_2_11_3_1
e_1_2_11_49_1
e_1_2_11_82_1
e_1_2_11_61_1
e_1_2_11_80_1
e_1_2_11_21_1
e_1_2_11_44_1
e_1_2_11_67_1
e_1_2_11_46_1
e_1_2_11_69_1
e_1_2_11_25_1
e_1_2_11_40_1
e_1_2_11_63_1
e_1_2_11_9_1
e_1_2_11_23_1
e_1_2_11_42_1
e_1_2_11_65_1
e_1_2_11_84_1
e_1_2_11_18_1
e_1_2_11_16_1
e_1_2_11_37_1
e_1_2_11_39_1
References_xml – volume: 75
  start-page: 1197
  year: 2012
  end-page: 203
  article-title: Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 55
  start-page: 332
  year: 2022
  end-page: 8
  article-title: Quality indicators in colonoscopy: The chasm between ideal and reality
  publication-title: Clin Endosc
– volume: 45
  start-page: 404
  year: 2012
  end-page: 11
  article-title: The effect of the bowel preparation status on the risk of missing polyp and adenoma during screening colonoscopy: A tandem colonoscopic study
  publication-title: Clin Endosc
– volume: 66
  start-page: 270
  year: 2017
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Split‐dose preparation for colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate: A randomised controlled trial in an organised screening programme
  publication-title: Gut
– volume: 61
  start-page: 72
  year: 2005
  end-page: 5
  article-title: A prospective study of factors that determine cecal intubation time at colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 22
  start-page: 1239
  year: 2021
  end-page: 51
  article-title: On the correlation between outcome indicators and the structure and process indicators used to proxy them in public health care reporting
  publication-title: Eur J Health Econ
– volume: 150
  start-page: 396
  year: 2016
  end-page: 405
  article-title: Quantification of adequate bowel preparation for screening or surveillance colonoscopy in men
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 20
  start-page: 2023
  year: 2022
  end-page: 31.e6
  article-title: High‐definition colonoscopy compared with cuff‐ and cap‐assisted colonoscopy: Results from a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial
  publication-title: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
– volume: 15
  start-page: 878
  year: 2021
  end-page: 86
  article-title: Adherence to surveillance guidelines after the removal of colorectal polyps: A multinational, multicenter, prospective survey
  publication-title: Gut Liver
– volume: 157
  start-page: 462
  year: 2019
  end-page: 71
  article-title: Narrow‐band imaging for detection of neoplasia at colonoscopy: A meta‐analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 2019
  start-page: 7476023
  year: 2019
  article-title: Same‐day regimen as an alternative to split preparation for colonoscopy: A systematic review with meta‐analysis
  publication-title: Gastroenterol Res Pract
– volume: 69
  start-page: 620
  year: 2009
  end-page: 5
  article-title: The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale: A valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy‐oriented research
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 27
  start-page: 91
  year: 2023
  end-page: 101
  article-title: Endocuff‐assisted versus standard colonoscopy for improving adenoma detection rate: Meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials
  publication-title: Tech Coloproctol
– volume: 105
  start-page: 1925
  year: 2010
  end-page: 33
  article-title: Improving colonoscopy quality through health‐care payment reform
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 37
  start-page: 495
  year: 2022
  end-page: 506
  article-title: Effect of artificial intelligence‐aided colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: A meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials
  publication-title: Int J Colorectal Dis
– volume: 149
  start-page: 952
  year: 2015
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Longer withdrawal time is associated with a reduced incidence of interval cancer after screening colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 153
  start-page: 98
  year: 2017
  end-page: 105
  article-title: Increased rate of adenoma detection associates with reduced risk of colorectal cancer and death
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 36
  start-page: 3260
  year: 2021
  end-page: 7
  article-title: A comparison of 9‐min colonoscopy withdrawal time and 6‐min colonoscopy withdrawal time: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
  publication-title: J Gastroenterol Hepatol
– volume: 53
  start-page: 394
  year: 2021
  end-page: 401
  article-title: Usefulness of mean number of adenomas per positive screenee for identifying meticulous endoscopists among those who achieve acceptable adenoma detection rates
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 150
  start-page: 1
  year: 2018
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Post‐colonoscopy colorectal cancer: Characteristics and predictive factors
  publication-title: Med Clin (Barc)
– volume: 89
  start-page: 545
  year: 2019
  end-page: 53
  article-title: G‐EYE colonoscopy is superior to standard colonoscopy for increasing adenoma detection rate: An international randomized controlled trial (with videos)
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 369
  start-page: 1106
  year: 2013
  end-page: 14
  article-title: Long‐term mortality after screening for colorectal cancer
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– volume: 327
  start-page: 2114
  year: 2022
  end-page: 22
  article-title: Association of physician adenoma detection rates with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer
  publication-title: JAMA
– volume: 161
  start-page: 701
  year: 2021
  end-page: 11
  article-title: AGA clinical practice update on strategies to improve quality of screening and surveillance colonoscopy: Expert review
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 8
  start-page: 826
  year: 2016
  end-page: 34
  article-title: Colon adenoma features and their impact on risk of future advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer
  publication-title: World J Gastrointest Oncol
– volume: 362
  start-page: 1795
  year: 2010
  end-page: 803
  article-title: Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– volume: 19
  start-page: 190
  year: 2019
  article-title: Ileal intubation is not associated with higher detection rate of right‐sided conventional adenomas and serrated polyps compared to cecal intubation after adjustment for overall adenoma detection rate
  publication-title: BMC Gastroenterol
– volume: 81
  start-page: 31
  year: 2015
  end-page: 53
  article-title: Quality indicators for colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 61
  start-page: 1180
  year: 2012
  end-page: 6
  article-title: Long‐term risk of colorectal cancer after adenoma removal: A population‐based cohort study
  publication-title: Gut
– volume: 93
  start-page: 77
  year: 2021
  end-page: 85.e6
  article-title: Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 164
  start-page: 470
  year: 2022
  end-page: 2.e3
  article-title: Post‐colonoscopy colorectal cancer etiologies in a large integrated US health care setting
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 355
  start-page: 2533
  year: 2006
  end-page: 41
  article-title: Colonoscopic withdrawal times and adenoma detection during screening colonoscopy
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– volume: 111
  start-page: 197
  year: 2016
  end-page: 204
  article-title: Validated scales for colon cleansing: A systematic review
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 55
  start-page: 307
  year: 2002
  end-page: 14
  article-title: Procedural success and complications of large‐scale screening colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 101
  start-page: 721
  year: 2006
  end-page: 31
  article-title: Quality assessment of colonoscopic cecal intubation: An analysis of 6 years of continuous practice at a university hospital
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 111
  start-page: 723
  year: 2016
  end-page: 9
  article-title: The secondary quality indicator to improve prediction of adenoma miss rate apart from adenoma detection rate
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 31
  start-page: 67
  year: 2022
  end-page: 73
  article-title: The effect of linked color imaging for adenoma detection. A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled studies
  publication-title: J Gastrointestin Liver Dis
– volume: 140
  start-page: 65
  year: 2011
  end-page: 72
  article-title: Analysis of administrative data finds endoscopist quality measures associated with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 42
  start-page: 599
  year: 2013
  end-page: 618
  article-title: Colonoscopy quality: Metrics and implementation
  publication-title: Gastroenterol Clin North Am
– volume: 173
  start-page: 81
  year: 2020
  end-page: 91
  article-title: Long‐term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after a single negative screening colonoscopy
  publication-title: Ann Intern Med
– volume: 61
  start-page: 1050
  year: 2012
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Colonoscopy quality measures: Experience from the NHS bowel cancer screening programme
  publication-title: Gut
– volume: 85
  start-page: 1273
  year: 2017
  end-page: 80
  article-title: Adenoma miss rates associated with a 3‐minute versus 6‐minute colonoscopy withdrawal time: A prospective, randomized trial
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 109
  start-page: 1375
  year: 2014
  end-page: 89
  article-title: Prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of interval colorectal cancers: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 87
  start-page: 1324
  year: 2018
  end-page: 34.e4
  article-title: Temporal trends in postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates in 50‐ to 74‐year‐old persons: A population‐based study
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 33
  start-page: 1341
  year: 2021
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Long‐term cumulative incidence of metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia after colonoscopy and a novel risk factor: A cohort study
  publication-title: Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol
– volume: 61
  start-page: 378
  year: 2005
  end-page: 84
  article-title: Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: The European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 49
  start-page: 378
  year: 2017
  end-page: 97
  article-title: Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: A European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 105
  start-page: 1301
  year: 2010
  end-page: 1307
  article-title: High‐definition chromocolonoscopy vs. high‐definition white light colonoscopy for average‐risk colorectal cancer screening
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 366
  start-page: 687
  year: 2012
  end-page: 96
  article-title: Colonoscopic polypectomy and long‐term prevention of colorectal‐cancer deaths
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– volume: 60
  start-page: 485
  year: 2011
  end-page: 90
  article-title: Pancolonic chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine versus standard colonoscopy for detection of neoplastic lesions: A randomised two‐centre trial
  publication-title: Gut
– volume: 49
  start-page: 186
  year: 2017
  end-page: 90
  article-title: The adenoma miss rate of blue‐laser imaging vs. white‐light imaging during colonoscopy: A randomized tandem trial
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 2
  start-page: 282
  year: 2018
  end-page: 7
  article-title: Impact of retroflexion in the right colon after repeated forward‐view examinations
  publication-title: JGH Open
– volume: 91
  start-page: 463
  year: 2020
  end-page: 85.e5
  article-title: Recommendations for follow‐up after colonoscopy and polypectomy: A consensus update by the US Multi‐Society Task Force on colorectal cancer
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 72
  start-page: 686
  year: 2010
  end-page: 92
  article-title: Comprehensive validation of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 155
  start-page: 909
  year: 2018
  end-page: 25.e3
  article-title: World Endoscopy Organization consensus statements on post‐colonoscopy and post‐imaging colorectal cancer
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 51
  start-page: 33
  year: 2000
  end-page: 6
  article-title: Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 14
  start-page: 1155
  year: 2016
  end-page: 62
  article-title: High‐quality bowel preparation is required for detection of sessile serrated polyps
  publication-title: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
– volume: 260
  start-page: 1743
  year: 1988
  end-page: 8
  article-title: The quality of care. How can it be assessed?
  publication-title: JAMA
– volume: 11
  start-page: goad009
  year: 2023
  article-title: Key quality indicators in colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf)
– volume: 88
  start-page: 589
  year: 2018
  end-page: 97.e11
  article-title: Water exchange colonoscopy increases adenoma detection rate: A systematic review with network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled studies
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 35
  start-page: 354
  year: 2023
  end-page: 60
  article-title: Randomized controlled trial of EndoRings assisted colonoscopy versus standard colonoscopy
  publication-title: Dig Endosc
– volume: 48
  start-page: 256
  year: 2016
  end-page: 62
  article-title: Monitoring colonoscopy withdrawal time significantly improves the adenoma detection rate and the performance of endoscopists
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 118
  start-page: 802
  year: 2022
  end-page: 11
  article-title: Reduced adenoma miss rate with 9‐minute vs 6‐minute withdrawal times for screening colonoscopy: A multicenter randomized tandem trial
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 13
  start-page: 475
  year: 2001
  end-page: 80
  article-title: Process versus outcome indicators in the assessment of quality of health care
  publication-title: Int J Qual Health Care
– volume: 34
  start-page: 1545
  year: 2019
  end-page: 53
  article-title: Epidemiology, characteristics, and survival of post‐colonoscopy colorectal cancer in Asia: A population‐based study
  publication-title: J Gastroenterol Hepatol
– volume: 74
  start-page: 128
  year: 2011
  end-page: 34
  article-title: Quality of colonoscopy withdrawal technique and variability in adenoma detection rates (with videos)
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 45
  start-page: 142
  year: 2013
  end-page: 50
  article-title: Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 87
  start-page: 744
  year: 2018
  end-page: 51
  article-title: Inadequate Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores predict the risk of missed neoplasia on the next colonoscopy
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 370
  start-page: 1298
  year: 2014
  end-page: 306
  article-title: Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– year: 2022
  article-title: Comparison of artificial intelligence with other interventions to improve adenoma detection rate for colonoscopy: A network meta‐analysis
  publication-title: J Clin Gastroenterol
– volume: 343
  start-page: 162
  year: 2000
  end-page: 8
  article-title: Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380
  publication-title: N Engl J Med
– volume: 97
  start-page: 537
  year: 2023
  end-page: 43.e2
  article-title: Impact of withdrawal time on adenoma detection rate: Results from a prospective multicenter trial
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 97
  start-page: 1296
  year: 2002
  end-page: 308
  article-title: Quality in the technical performance of colonoscopy and the continuous quality improvement process for colonoscopy: Recommendations of the U.S. Multi‐Society Task Force on colorectal cancer
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 149
  start-page: 79
  year: 2015
  end-page: 88
  article-title: Split‐dose preparations are superior to day‐before bowel cleansing regimens: A meta‐analysis
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 147
  start-page: 903
  year: 2014
  end-page: 24
  article-title: Optimizing adequacy of bowel cleansing for colonoscopy: Recommendations from the US Multi‐Society Task Force on colorectal cancer
  publication-title: Gastroenterology
– volume: 72
  start-page: 338
  year: 2023
  end-page: 44
  article-title: Global burden of colorectal cancer in 2020 and 2040: Incidence and mortality estimates from GLOBOCAN
  publication-title: Gut
– volume: 115
  start-page: 1183
  year: 2020
  end-page: 90
  article-title: State of the science on quality indicators for colonoscopy and how to achieve them
  publication-title: Am J Gastroenterol
– volume: 75
  start-page: 98
  year: 2012
  end-page: 106
  article-title: Quality evaluation of colonoscopy reporting and colonoscopy performance in daily clinical practice
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 79
  start-page: 448
  year: 2014
  end-page: 54
  article-title: Improving measurement of the adenoma detection rate and adenoma per colonoscopy quality metric: The Indiana University experience
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 51
  start-page: 858
  year: 2019
  end-page: 65
  article-title: Key performance measures for colonoscopy in the Polish colonoscopy screening program
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– volume: 82
  start-page: 529
  year: 2015
  end-page: 37.e1
  article-title: Protective association of colonoscopy against proximal and distal colon cancer and patterns in interval cancer
  publication-title: Gastrointest Endosc
– volume: 6
  year: 2015
  article-title: Colonoscopy: Quality indicators
  publication-title: Clin Transl Gastroenterol
– volume: 51
  start-page: 886
  year: 2016
  end-page: 90
  article-title: Comparison of adenoma detection rate and adenoma per colonoscopy as a quality indicator of colonoscopy
  publication-title: Scand J Gastroenterol
– volume: 17
  start-page: 357
  year: 2016
  end-page: 65
  article-title: Quantitative assessment of the effect of position changes during colonoscopy withdrawal
  publication-title: J Dig Dis
– ident: e_1_2_11_61_1
  doi: 10.3109/00365521.2016.1157892
– ident: e_1_2_11_30_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.005
– ident: e_1_2_11_70_1
  doi: 10.1016/S0016-5107(00)70383-X
– volume: 49
  start-page: 186
  year: 2017
  ident: e_1_2_11_81_1
  article-title: The adenoma miss rate of blue‐laser imaging vs. white‐light imaging during colonoscopy: A randomized tandem trial
  publication-title: Endoscopy
– ident: e_1_2_11_4_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1300720
– ident: e_1_2_11_11_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.11.031
– ident: e_1_2_11_35_1
  doi: 10.5946/ce.2022.037
– ident: e_1_2_11_51_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.11.030
– ident: e_1_2_11_79_1
  doi: 10.1136/gut.2010.229534
– ident: e_1_2_11_80_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.014
– ident: e_1_2_11_33_1
  doi: 10.1093/gastro/goad009
– ident: e_1_2_11_5_1
  doi: 10.7326/M19-2477
– ident: e_1_2_11_76_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.12.037
– ident: e_1_2_11_29_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012
– ident: e_1_2_11_37_1
  doi: 10.1055/s-0043-103411
– ident: e_1_2_11_38_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.053
– ident: e_1_2_11_42_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJM200007203430301
– ident: e_1_2_11_54_1
  doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1569674
– ident: e_1_2_11_28_1
  doi: 10.5946/ce.2012.45.4.404
– ident: e_1_2_11_78_1
  doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.51
– ident: e_1_2_11_34_1
  doi: 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02776-2
– ident: e_1_2_11_7_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907667
– ident: e_1_2_11_18_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.058
– ident: e_1_2_11_44_1
  doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300651
– ident: e_1_2_11_9_1
  doi: 10.1111/jgh.14674
– ident: e_1_2_11_60_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.10.013
– ident: e_1_2_11_69_1
  doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310685
– ident: e_1_2_11_67_1
  doi: 10.1155/2019/7476023
– ident: e_1_2_11_25_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.044
– ident: e_1_2_11_3_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100370
– ident: e_1_2_11_50_1
  doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002055
– ident: e_1_2_11_16_1
  doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05812.x
– ident: e_1_2_11_49_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.06.044
– ident: e_1_2_11_73_1
  doi: 10.1111/1751-2980.12343
– ident: e_1_2_11_75_1
  doi: 10.1111/den.14432
– ident: e_1_2_11_21_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.01.014
– ident: e_1_2_11_12_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.05.038
– ident: e_1_2_11_68_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.004
– ident: e_1_2_11_40_1
  doi: 10.1186/s12876-019-1111-0
– ident: e_1_2_11_45_1
  doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.247
– ident: e_1_2_11_10_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.12.027
– ident: e_1_2_11_74_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10151-022-02642-9
– ident: e_1_2_11_64_1
  doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300295
– ident: e_1_2_11_19_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.07.002
– ident: e_1_2_11_56_1
  doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000622
– ident: e_1_2_11_8_1
  doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.171
– ident: e_1_2_11_6_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1309086
– ident: e_1_2_11_53_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.09.031
– ident: e_1_2_11_65_1
  doi: 10.5009/gnl20166
– ident: e_1_2_11_13_1
  doi: 10.1001/jama.1988.03410120089033
– ident: e_1_2_11_66_1
  doi: 10.1055/a-0956-1889
– ident: e_1_2_11_26_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2017.04.015
– ident: e_1_2_11_39_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.09.006
– ident: e_1_2_11_82_1
  doi: 10.15403/jgld-4027
– ident: e_1_2_11_46_1
  doi: 10.1038/ctg.2015.5
– ident: e_1_2_11_72_1
  doi: 10.1002/jgh3.12084
– ident: e_1_2_11_32_1
  doi: 10.1067/mge.2002.121883
– ident: e_1_2_11_36_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.006
– ident: e_1_2_11_41_1
  doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00494.x
– ident: e_1_2_11_47_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.06.032
– ident: e_1_2_11_52_1
  doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055498
– ident: e_1_2_11_62_1
  doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v8.i12.826
– ident: e_1_2_11_77_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.09.028
– ident: e_1_2_11_23_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.06.068
– ident: e_1_2_11_58_1
  doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.440
– ident: e_1_2_11_31_1
  doi: 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02461-7
– ident: e_1_2_11_57_1
  doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.6644
– ident: e_1_2_11_59_1
  doi: 10.1055/a-1201-0226
– ident: e_1_2_11_48_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gtc.2013.05.005
– ident: e_1_2_11_14_1
  doi: 10.1093/intqhc/13.6.475
– ident: e_1_2_11_24_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057
– ident: e_1_2_11_83_1
  doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001813
– ident: e_1_2_11_22_1
  doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.417
– ident: e_1_2_11_15_1
  doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01333-w
– ident: e_1_2_11_17_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.05.041
– ident: e_1_2_11_20_1
  doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326186
– ident: e_1_2_11_43_1
  doi: 10.1111/jgh.15701
– ident: e_1_2_11_84_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059
– ident: e_1_2_11_85_1
  doi: 10.1007/s00384-021-04062-x
– ident: e_1_2_11_55_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.03.003
– ident: e_1_2_11_2_1
  doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327736
– ident: e_1_2_11_63_1
  doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000002259
– ident: e_1_2_11_27_1
  doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.09.041
– ident: e_1_2_11_71_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.06.028
SSID ssj0012944
Score 2.3669157
SecondaryResourceType review_article
Snippet Colonoscopy is widely used as a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tool. The effectiveness of a screening colonoscopy is associated with a decreased risk of...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
crossref
wiley
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage 30
SubjectTerms Adenoma - diagnosis
Cecum
colon cancer
colon cancer screening
colonoscopy
Colonoscopy - methods
Colorectal Neoplasms - diagnosis
Colorectal Neoplasms - epidemiology
Colorectal Neoplasms - prevention & control
Early Detection of Cancer - methods
Humans
indicator
quality
Quality Indicators, Health Care
Title What are the priority quality indicators for colonoscopy in real‐world clinical practice?
URI https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fden.14635
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37422906
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2845654438
Volume 36
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LSwMxEA7Fg3jx_agvonjwsmW7yb7wIKItRbAHsVBQWJJsAmLZlj4OevIn-Bv9Jc5kH1gfIN6W3dklm8lkvklmvhBywpj2PWOMI5saApRIGUc049AxXswVE64JtE2Q7QadHr_u-_0aOStrYXJ-iGrBDS3Dztdo4EJOPhk5mCWaOcMCc8zVQkB0W1FHgRuzB7mCO_QdH6QKViHM4qnenPdF3wDmPF61Dqe9Qh7KpuZ5Jk-N2VQ21MsXFsd__ssqWS6AKL3IR84aqelsnSzeFFvtG-QeSb2pGGsKEJGOxo9DPOaO5kWYzxS3uhUG7BMKsJci93U2xBIXfEQBiQ7eX98sHSstiy9pWZF1vkl67dbdZccpTmJwFIMIytFCMOX6aWx4EMUiDVXKvaYyUqW-caWR0hPMN5GXAoARgYxSFsMt0YQZQyDJ2hZZyIaZ3iE0jF0dMy6DKNKcs1ByTyoXYZVgngnTOjktdZKogqYcT8sYJGW4Ap2V2M6qk-NKdJRzc_wkdFQqNgHLwe0QkenhbJKAYwY0C22I6mQ713j1GRZyS4QPrbF6-_37yVWray92_y66R5Y8wEb5Ss4-WZiOZ_oAsM1UHtpB_AHj_fZI
linkProvider Wiley-Blackwell
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3dSxwxEB-sgu1Lq7a2Z7Wm0gdfVnY3yX5AoYgfnK3eg3hwUMqSZBMolT057x7aJ_8E_0b_EmeyH1SrUHxbdmeXbCaT-U2S-Q3AJ86tjJ1zgY4sBiiZcYGK8jRwcS4MV6FLrD8gO0j6Q_F1JEdz8LnNhan5IboFN7IMP1-TgdOC9F9WjnZJds7lM1igit4-oDrtyKPQkflSrugQZSBRrOEVonM83at3vdE_EPMuYvUu5_AV_GgbW580-bUzm-od8-cej-NT_2YJXjZYlO3Wg2cZ5my1AosnzW77a_hOvN5MTSxDlMguJj_HVOmO1XmYvxntdhuK2S8ZIl9G9NfVmLJc6BFDMHp-c3XtGVlZm3_J2qSsL29geHhwttcPmmIMgeEYRAVWKW5CWeZOJFmuytSUIo6M06aULtRO61hx6bK4RAyjEp2VPMdbKsJJQxHP2irMV-PKvgOW5qHNudBJllkheKpFrE1IyErx2KVlD7ZbpRSmYSqnghnnRRuxYGcVvrN6sNWJXtT0HA8JfWw1W6Dx0I6Iqux4dlmgb0ZAi23IevC2Vnn3GZ4Kz4WPrfGKe_z7xf7BwF-s_b_oJjzvn50cF8dHg2_v4UWMUKle2FmH-elkZjcQ6kz1Bz-ibwE-Lvpj
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1ZS8QwEB48QHzxPtYzig--VLpNeuGDiOviuYgoCAolSRMQl-6y7j7okz_B3-gvcZIeeIL4VtppSTOZzDdJ5huALUqV72mtHVFXGKBEUju8HoeO9mImKXd1oOwB2VZwdM1ObvybIdgtc2Fyfohqwc1Yhp2vjYF3U_3ByNEsjZlTfxhGWeBGZkg3LivuKPRjtpIr-kPf8VGsoBUyx3iqVz87o28I8zNgtR6nOQl3ZVvzgyYPO4O-2JHPX2gc__kzUzBRIFGynw-daRhS2QyMnRd77bNwa1i9Ce8pghiRdHv3HVPnjuRZmE_E7HVLE7E_EsS9xJBfZx2T42IeEYSi7beXV8vHSsrsS1KmZO3NwXXz8OrgyClKMTiSYgjlKM6pdP001iyIYp6GMmVeXWohU1-7QgvhcerryEsRwfBARCmN8Rav45TBDcvaPIxknUwtAgljV8WUiSCKFGM0FMwT0jW4ilNPh2kNtkudJLLgKTflMtpJGa9gZyW2s2qwWYl2c3KOn4Q2SsUmaDpmP4RnqjN4TNAzI5zFNkQ1WMg1Xn2Ghswy4WNrrN5-_37SOGzZi6W_i67D2EWjmZwdt06XYdxDnJSv6qzASL83UKuIc_pizY7nd3aX-Rs
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What+are+the+priority+quality+indicators+for+colonoscopy+in+real-world+clinical+practice%3F&rft.jtitle=Digestive+endoscopy&rft.au=Tiankanon%2C+Kasenee&rft.au=Aniwan%2C+Satimai&rft.date=2024-01-01&rft.issn=1443-1661&rft.eissn=1443-1661&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=30&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fden.14635&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0915-5635&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0915-5635&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0915-5635&client=summon