A comparative analysis of the upper gastrointestinal endoscopic reporting systems within the Durban Metropolitan complex.

BACKGROUND

The minimal standard terminology (MST) was developed by the World Endoscopy Organization (WEO) to standardise endoscopic reporting. This study compared current reporting within the Durban Metropolitan complex with the MST.

METHODS

This observational retrospective study included 130 upper gastrointestinal endoscopy reports from five different hospitals. The data were compared to the current reporting standard in the MST. The Noorbhai Maharaj (NM) score was used to assess and grade the quality of reporting.

RESULTS

Each of the five hospitals has different endoscopic reporting systems. One hundred and thirty patients were included in the study, of which 60 were female. The indications for upper endoscopy were stated in 77 reports (59%). The commonest indications were epigastric pain (23%), dyspepsia (10%) and heartburn (10%). Sedation information per hospital was mostly seen at Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital (IALCH) (83%), followed by Prince Mshiyeni Memorial Hospital (PMMH) (67%), Addington (ADH) (13%), King Edward VIII Hospital (KEH) (13%), and RK Khan Hospital (RKKH) (0%). Consultant endoscopies per hospital were RKKH (91%), IALCH (86%), PMMH (78%), ADH (73%) and KEH (40%). All 130 reports were graded as NM Grade C. Scores of less than 20 points were seen in 106 reports (82%) and reflected across the different hospitals as follows: RKKH (100%), ADH (97%), KEH (93%), PMMH (56%) and IALCH (55%).

CONCLUSION

There is no uniform structured endoscopic reporting system within the Durban Metropolitan Hospital complex. The current reporting methods do not meet the MST. The introduction of a structured standard endoscopic reporting system could improve the quality of reporting.