4.7 Article

ASGE guideline for infection control during GI endoscopy

Journal

GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
Volume 87, Issue 5, Pages 1167-1179

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.12.009

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Quality Assurance in Endoscopy Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) updated and revised this document, which was originally prepared by The Standards of Practice Committee of the ASGE and was published in 2008.1 In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed, supplemented by accessing the related-articles feature of PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data existed from welldesigned prospective trials, emphasis was given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. This guideline is intended to be an educational tool to provide information that may assist endoscopists in delivering care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient's condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available