http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/1487/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20910/ 2010-09-01T00:00:00Z Objective. Gastrointestinal endoscopy databases are important for surveillance, epidemiology, quality control and research. A good quality of automatically generated databases to enable drawing justified conclusions based on the data is of key importance. The aim of this study is to validate the correctness of coding of a national automatically generated anonymous endoscopy database. Material and methods. We evaluated a total of 500 colonoscopies performed in five larger hospitals of the TRANS.IT project focusing on endoscopy reporting. Randomly 500 examinations were selected from a total of 5,000 examinations and their generated endoscopic terminology codes as well as complete reports were analysed. Indications for the examination and described findings were scored for correctness and clinical relevance of the coding that would be exported to the anonymous database. Results. Indications were correctly coded in 92% of all examinations (range 76100%) per hospital. Correct coding of findings ranged from 42% to 93% per hospital (mean 77%). Different correct coding proportions were seen varying with the diagnosis, with the highest correct coding rates in polyps, carcinoma and diverticular disease. Incorrect coded examinations were scored for clinical relevance. Overall 11% of the investigated examinations were incorrectly coded with clinical relevance. Conclusions. Accuracy of clinically relevant endoscopy data recorded in the TRANS.IT anonymous central database is high. Further improvement is desirable, which may be achieved by education of individual endoscopists and enhancement of the program. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10404/ 2006-01-01T00:00:00Z BACKGROUND: The widespread use of gastrointestinal endoscopy for diagnosis and treatment requires effective, standardised report systems. This need is further increased by the limited storage of images, and by the need for structured databases for surveillance and epidemiology. We therefore aimed for a report system which would be quick, easy to learn, and suitable for use in busy daily practice. METHODS: Endobase III is an endoscopy information system offering three different ways of report writing, i.e. standard reports, text blocks and Minimal Standard Terminology (MST). A working group of two university and four general hospitals worked as a reference group for the development of standard reports and text blocks. Guidelines from various gastrointestinal endoscopy societies were followed to compose the reports. RESULTS: Standard reports were based on a list of distinct diagnoses; text blocks were based on anatomic landmarks and individual procedures. As such, 316 standard reports were developed for upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In this way selecting one diagnosis produces a complete report. A total of 1571 different text blocks were additionally developed for each part of the gastrointestinal tract and for procedures during endoscopy. This module allowed generation of a full report on the combination of text blocks. Reports could be composed and printed within two minutes for 90% of cases. CONCLUSION: Standard reports and text blocks are a quick, user-friendly way of report writing accepted and used by a number of gastroenterologists in the Netherlands.