RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The introduction of the S3 guideline on "Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy" in 2008 led to substantial organisational, structural, staffing-related, financial, and legal changes in the everyday work of departments of gastrointestinal endoscopy. This study examines the economic effects of this and the change in the legal situation. In addition, the extent to which the guideline has been implemented was assessed using an electronic questionnaire circulated to the members of the Working Group of Head Gastroenterologists in Hospitals (ALGK). METHODS: The increased financial burden in the area of staff costs resulting from correct compliance with the sedation guideline was calculated using research figures from an endoscopy department in a maximum-care non-university hospital, dating from 2009. Interpretation of the legal implications of the guideline was provided by lawyers familiar with medical legislation. The question of the extent to which the guideline has been implemented in everyday clinical practice in endoscopy departments in 2011 was investigated using an evaluation questionnaire sent to the members of the ALGK. RESULTS: Implementation of the S3 sedation guideline leads to a substantial increase in the financial burden in the area of staff costs. Assuming 8000 in-patient endoscopy procedures, a conservative estimate indicates extra costs amounting to 257 462.- per year (gross costs for the employer). The analysis of the questionnaire sent to ALGK members on the implementation of the S3 guideline 3 years after its publication showed that its major points, particularly the deployment of a third staff member for sedation, have not been acted on. CONCLUSIONS: The S3 guideline on "Sedation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy" leads to a substantial increase in the financial burden in the area of staff costs by requiring the presence of a third person exclusively concerned with sedation. This recommendation was issued by the authors of the guideline without any evidence being available. In addition, it leads to a clear change in the legal situation, which in case of claims arising is associated with substantial implications for the physician responsible. The questionnaire evaluation among the members of the ALGK showed that the guideline has not so far been implemented in in-patient gastroenterology.
