目的 通过戴明循环管理法的品管圈（QCC）活动, 提升内镜中心病理标本标识的正确率与病理标本管理安全性。方法 采用基于戴明循环管理法的QCC活动, 对内镜中心病理标本标识质量进行现状把握、原因分析并制定对策, 比较QCC活动开展前后内镜病理标本标识的正确率。结果 QCC活动后, 内镜中心病理标本标识的正确率从99.8%提高至100%（P<0.05）。结论 内镜中心通过开展基于戴明循环管理法的QCC活动, 显著提升了内镜病理标本管理安全性与工作效率。

       Objective To improve the accuracy of pathological specimen identification and the safety of pathological specimen management in endoscopy center through quality control circle（QCC）activity based on Deming cycle management．Methods QCC activity based on Deming cycle management was used to summarize the status quo,analyze the causes and formulate countermeasures for the quality control of pathological specimen identification in endoscopy center．The accuracy rate of endoscopic pathological specimen identification before and after QCC activity was compared．Results After QCC activity, the accuracy of pathological specimen identification in endoscope center increased from 99.8% to 100%．Conclusions QCC activities based on Deming cycle management can greatly improve the safety and efficiency of endoscopic pathological specimen management．

目的 探讨联合镇静胃肠镜检查在安全性、可行性的效果以及优势方面的临床应用,为优化诊疗流程、方便患者提供科学依据。方法 纳入我院2017年6月—2018年3月行镇静胃肠镜检查的140例患者为研究对象,采用便利抽样法随机分为两组,观察组70例患者行联合镇静胃肠镜检查,对照组70例患者行胃肠镜分次检查。记录并对比分析两组患者的预约时间、检查时长、不适反应、疼痛程度、满意度、检查费用。结果 观察组在预约时间和检查时长、检查后心率变化,患者满意度和检查费用方面,与对照组相比有统计学差异(P＜0.05),而在血压、血氧、镇静及遗忘程度、疼痛程度及不适反应方面无统计学差异(P＞0.05)。结论 联合镇静胃肠镜检查在临床应用方面安全可行,具有便宜、时间少、患者配合度好、符合患者意愿、而且满意度高的优势,值得推广。

Objective To explore the scientific evidence in optimization of diagnosis and treatment process for patients' convenience, we evaluated the clinical effect of gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation on the safety, feasibility and advantage. Methods We enrolled 140 patients who came to our hospital for gastrointestinal endoscopy from June 2017 to March 2018. We used the convenience sampling method that the patients were randomly divided into two groups: observation group of 70 patients with combined endoscopy, and the control group of 70 patients with seperate endoscopy. We recorded and compared the two groups of patients of appointment time, inspection time, pain degree, patient satisfaction, and cost. Results The two groups were different in the appointment time, inspection time, heart rate changes after endoscopy, patient satisfaction and the costs (P<0.05), while no significant difference was found in blood pressure, blood oxygen degree, sedation, pain degree and discomfort reaction(P>0.05). Conclusion Combined sedative gastrointestinal endoscopy is safe and feasible in clinical application, with the advantages of low cost, less time, good patient cooperation, in line with the wishes of patients, and high satisfaction, which is worthy of popularization.