OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how gastroenterologists communicate endoscopic findings and biopsy results to their patients. We sought to determine the factors that may influence this behavior. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was developed and mailed to the 80 members of the Delaware Valley Society for GI Endoscopy. Information was obtained on the demographic characteristics and responses to six case vignettes prepared to examine communication patterns. We determined possible influences of conscious sedation and the benignity or severity of findings on communication practices. RESULTS: Sixty-one surveys (76%) were completed and analyzed. Endoscopists immediately inform patients of normal results. For abnormal results, 92% would immediately inform nonsedated patients versus 79% that would inform sedated patients (p < 0.008). Analysis of responses to the case vignettes indicated that 82% of endoscopists would immediately reassure the patient about a benign appearing (< 1 cm) polyp, but only 70% would do so for a polyp > 2 cm (p < 0.01). In contrast, when presented with a frank malignancy, 94% would inform the patient. Eighty-four percent of endoscopists would telephone results of a benign pathology report, but only 34% would telephone report a dysplastic lesion (p < 0.001). There was no correlation between the response rate and various demographic parameters such as physician age, type of, or length of time in practice. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroenterologists usually report normal findings immediately, but are less likely to do so after use of sedation or encountering abnormal findings. Most of those surveyed would use the telephone to communicate abnormal findings.
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how gastroenterologists communicate endoscopic findings and biopsy results to their patients. We sought to determine the factors that may influence this behavior. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was developed and mailed to the 80 members of the Delaware Valley Society for GI Endoscopy. Information was obtained on the demographic characteristics and responses to six case vignettes prepared to examine communication patterns. We determined possible influences of conscious sedation and the benignity or severity of findings on communication practices. RESULTS: Sixty-one surveys (76%) were completed and analyzed. Endoscopists immediately inform patients of normal results. For abnormal results, 92% would immediately inform nonsedated patients versus 79% that would inform sedated patients (p < 0.008). Analysis of responses to the case vignettes indicated that 82% of endoscopists would immediately reassure the patient about a benign appearing (< 1 cm) polyp, but only 70% would do so for a polyp > 2 cm (p < 0.01). In contrast, when presented with a frank malignancy, 94% would inform the patient. Eighty-four percent of endoscopists would telephone results of a benign pathology report, but only 34% would telephone report a dysplastic lesion (p < 0.001). There was no correlation between the response rate and various demographic parameters such as physician age, type of, or length of time in practice. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroenterologists usually report normal findings immediately, but are less likely to do so after use of sedation or encountering abnormal findings. Most of those surveyed would use the telephone to communicate abnormal findings.
Authors: Joanne Callen; Traber Davis Giardina; Hardeep Singh; Ling Li; Richard Paoloni; Andrew Georgiou; William B Runciman; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 5.428