Family man, Cleveland GI, Chair of GI UH Lake, OneGI, polyp remover, fighter of obesity. Tweets are my own, not medical advice, and do not represent employers
As a follow up, I’m curious to see the community’s opinion. Given the needs for ERCP in non-academic/tertiary facilities, should we give an option to train 3rd yr fellows in ERCP for stones and leaks? @EndoCollabcom
Basically, it’s an option that seems to have been centrally removed by the academic societies and it is having significant downstream effects in the community.
Advanced GI fellows seem to have a hard time finding positions to support complex procedures; however there is a large need for ERCP providers in the community. Is it time to resume training general GI fellows in basic ERCP skills to meet market needs? @EndoCollabcom
I certainly understand ERCP is high risk and it’s a common counterpoint. But waiting multiple days for transfers also has risk and healthcare costs associated. Community doc can be selective for cases (stones or leaks) and certainly don’t need to be managing more complex problems
@ParikhSimul @ChadTangMD A department or system can be assessed with this data, but like you guys, there is still a tremendous word of mouth component at the local level. At the national level, I believe it is similar, with publications and presence.
@ParikhSimul @ChadTangMD Our societies publish quality metrics to track, and these are reviewed within a department, and occasionally some providers will publicly report it, but certainly not the norm. Medicare reimbursement is also affected with meeting of certain quality metrics. Again not public info
@ParikhSimul @ChadTangMD So in GI, there are quality metrics being used within divisions of the field: eg in colonoscopies, adenoma and serrated polyp detection rates, withdrawal times, perforation, post procedural bleeding. These are not yet individually or publicly reported.