Unsedated small-caliber esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) - Less expensive and less time-consuming than conventional EGD

被引:27
作者
Gorelick, AB
Inadomi, JM
Barnett, JL
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Med Ctr, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] VA Ctr Practice Management & Outcomes Res, Ann Arbor, MI USA
关键词
unsedated small-caliber EGD; conventional EGD; expenses; outcomes;
D O I
10.1097/00004836-200109000-00008
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: A significant portion of the costs and complications of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) are related to the use of sedation. The feasibility and tolerability of small-caliber EGD (seEGD) without sedation has been evaluated; however, there is limited data concerning times and costs associated with this procedure as compared with conventional EGD (cEGD) with sedation. Study. Sixteen patients underwent scEGD with the Pentax EG-1840 (outside diameter, 6 mm) without sedation. A control group of 16 patients was matched for age, sex, day, and indication of procedure. The time of procedure, time in procedure room, time in recovery room, and procedure costs were determined in both the study and control groups. After the procedure, scEGD patients completed surveys consisting of visual-analogue scales to assess tolerance and preferences regarding sedation for future procedures. Results: Procedure time, procedure room time, and recovery room time was 5.2, 16.3, and 9 minutes for scEGD and 13.5, 34.9, and 41.3 minutes for cEGD, respectively (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The mean cost of scEGD, excluding physician fees, was $462.00, which was significantly lower than the $587.00 for cEGD (p < 0.001). Survey results revealed good tolerance for the unsedated procedure. Conclusions: Unsedated scEGD was well tolerated and resulted in a shorter time of procedure, less time spent in procedure room, reduced recovery room time, and lower costs as compared with cEGD with sedation.
引用
收藏
页码:210 / 214
页数:5
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [1] al-Altrakchi HA, 1989, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V35, P79
  • [2] A comparison of transnasal and transoral oesophagogastroduodenoscopy
    Bampton, PA
    Reid, DP
    Johnson, RD
    Fitch, RJ
    Dent, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 1998, 13 (06) : 579 - 584
  • [3] EVALUATION OF ONE-VISIT ENDOSCOPIC CLINIC FOR PATIENTS WITH DYSPEPSIA
    BEAVIS, AK
    LABROOY, S
    MISIEWICZ, JJ
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1979, 1 (6175) : 1387 - 1389
  • [4] BELL GD, 1990, ALIMENT PHARM THERAP, V4, P103
  • [5] MONITORING DURING SEDATION FOR ENDOSCOPY
    CARTER, AS
    BELL, GD
    COADY, T
    LEE, J
    MORDEN, A
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1989, 298 (6666) : 114 - 114
  • [6] A comparison of transnasal and transoral endoscopy with small-diameter endoscopes in unsedated patients
    Craig, A
    Hanlon, J
    Dent, J
    Schoeman, M
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1999, 49 (03) : 292 - 296
  • [7] SEDATION FOR UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY - RESULTS OF A NATIONWIDE SURVEY
    DANESHMEND, TK
    BELL, GD
    LOGAN, RFA
    [J]. GUT, 1991, 32 (01) : 12 - 15
  • [8] DANESHMEND TK, 1989, GUT, V30, pA750
  • [9] ENDOSCOPIC COMPLICATIONS - TEXAS EXPERIENCE
    DAVIS, RE
    GRAHAM, DY
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1979, 25 (04) : 146 - 149
  • [10] Peroral ultrathin endoscopy in adult patients
    DeGregorio, BT
    Poorman, JC
    Katon, RM
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1997, 45 (03) : 303 - 306