Collaboration of community hospital endosonographers improves diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) is the method of choice for establishing a pathological diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Data on quality and yield of EUS-guided TA performed in community hospitals are lacking. A study was performed to determine and improve the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided TA in a group of community hospitals. Methods Following analysis of the last 20 EUS-guided TA procedures of solid pancreatic lesions performed in each of four community hospitals, a collaborative EUS interest group was formed and a prospective registry was started. During meetings of the interest group, feedback on results per center were provided and strategies for improvement were discussed. Results In the BEFORE team formation cohort, 80 procedures were performed in 66 patients. In the AFTER team formation cohort, 133 procedures were performed in 125 patients. After team formation, the rate of adequate sample increased from 80 % (95 %CI [0.7 - 0.9]) to 95 % (95 %CI [0.9 - 1.0]) , diagnostic yield of malignancy improved from 28 % (95 %CI [0.2 - 0.4]) to 64 % (95 % CI [0.6 - 0.7]), and sensitivity of malignancy improved from 63 % (95 %CI [0.4 - 0.8]) to 84 % (95 %CI [0.8 - 0.9]). Multivariate regression analysis revealed team formation to be the only variable significantly associated with an increased rate of adequate sample. Conclusions Formation of a regional EUS interest group with regular feedback on results per center, and discussions on methods and techniques used, significantly improved the outcome of EUS-guided TA procedures in patients with solid pancreatic lesions in community hospitals.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Dutch Version of the Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV-NL).

The latent factor structure of the Dutch version of the Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV-NL) was examined with a series of confirmatory factor analyses. As part of the Dutch standardization, 1,188 healthy participants completed the WMS-IV-NL. Four models were tested for the Adult Battery (16-69 years; N = 699), and two models were tested for the Older Adult Battery (65-90 years; N = 489). Results corroborated the presence of three WMS-IV-NL factors in the Adult Battery consisting of Auditory Memory, Visual Memory, and Visual Working Memory. A two-factor model (consisting of Auditory Memory and Visual Memory) provided the best fit for the data of the Older Adult Battery. These findings provide evidence for the structural validity of the WMS-IV-NL, and further support the psychometric integrity of the WMS-IV.