Documentation of surgical findings of endometriosis in teenagers and women attending the Canberra Endometriosis Centre: a best practice implementation project

In: JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports · 2013 · vol. 11(7) , pp. 434–448 · doi:10.11124/jbisrir-2013-1104 · W1985397686
Non-randomised trial OA: closed CC0
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-13 ⓘ

This project implemented a surgical documentation tool to improve the detailed recording of endometriosis lesion characteristics during laparoscopy, achieving near-perfect compliance for lesion type, location, size, and depth.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-08-22 · read from full text ⓘ

This best practice implementation project evaluated the accuracy of surgical documentation for endometriosis in teenagers and women undergoing laparoscopy at a tertiary hospital. The researchers conducted pre- and post-implementation audits using a simple tool that required recording lesion type, location, size, and depth, finding that baseline records lacked detail on lesion characteristics despite high rates of location documentation. Post-implementation results showed near-perfect compliance with the new documentation standards, confirming that such tools can effectively improve data quality. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically focusing on standardizing the surgical documentation of disease findings during operative procedures.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Background Endometriosis is a complex disease and presents many challenges to documentation and classification of surgical findings during laparoscopy/laparotomy. Detailed and accurate recording of disease is important for women, surgeons and research consistency. Objectives To improve documentation of surgical findings of endometriosis in accordance to the best available evidence in teenagers and women undergoing laparoscopy at a tertiary hospital gynaecology unit. Methods A convenience sample of women undergoing surgery for diagnosed endometriosis through the Canberra Endometriosis Centre or gynaecology unit of the Canberra Hospital. This project followed a three phase pre/post implementation audit process using the Joanna Briggs Institute PACES and GRiP programs that included: a pre implementation retrospective audit of operation records, implementation of a simple surgical documentation tool and post implementation audit. Four criteria were applied to each lesion rather than each woman and included type, location, size and depth of lesion. Results In the baseline audit 12 women provided 55 lesions and in the post audit 5 women provided 23 lesions. In the pre audit, location of disease was documented in 98% cases, type of lesion in 45% and size and depth of lesions 14% and 16% respectively. Implementation of the documentation tool was successful and compliance was 100% excepting cases of adhesions where size was ‘not applicable’ (94%). Conclusion According to current best evidence and baseline auditing of surgical documentation more detailed surgical documentation of endometriosis is required. This project showed that this can be obtained through a simple documentation tool however further testing in surgeon's compliance is required.
Full text 1,960 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Background

Endometriosis is a complex disease and presents many challenges to documentation and classification of surgical findings during laparoscopy/laparotomy. Detailed and accurate recording of disease is important for women, surgeons and research consistency.

Objectives

To improve documentation of surgical findings of endometriosis in accordance to the best available evidence in teenagers and women undergoing laparoscopy at a tertiary hospital gynaecology unit.

Methods

A convenience sample of women undergoing surgery for diagnosed endometriosis through the Canberra Endometriosis Centre or gynaecology unit of the Canberra Hospital. This project followed a three phase pre/post implementation audit process using the Joanna Briggs Institute PACES and GRiP programs that included: a pre implementation retrospective audit of operation records, implementation of a simple surgical documentation tool and post implementation audit. Four criteria were applied to each lesion rather than each woman and included type, location, size and depth of lesion.

Results

In the baseline audit 12 women provided 55 lesions and in the post audit 5 women provided 23 lesions. In the pre audit, location of disease was documented in 98% cases, type of lesion in 45% and size and depth of lesions 14% and 16% respectively. Implementation of the documentation tool was successful and compliance was 100% excepting cases of adhesions where size was ‘not applicable’ (94%).

Conclusion

According to current best evidence and baseline auditing of surgical documentation more detailed surgical documentation of endometriosis is required. This project showed that this can be obtained through a simple documentation tool however further testing in surgeon's compliance is required.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (3)

References (7)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-10-12T06:33:14.382917+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK