Literature DB >> 18155431

Providing an endoscopy report to patients after a procedure: a low-cost intervention with high returns.

Maya Spodik1, Joshua Goldman, Kirsten Merli, Cathy Walker, Barbara Alpini, David Kastenberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Providing a procedure report to patients after endoscopy is inconsistently practiced by clinicians.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of providing a procedure report to patients after an outpatient endoscopy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Demographic data, including age, sex, race, and endoscopic procedures. Assessments one week after the procedure included anxiety, satisfaction, recall of endoscopic findings and recommendations, and compliance.
DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, single-center, investigator-blinded study. Anxiety was measured by using the Beck Anxiety Inventory; satisfaction was measured with a modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy survey, which was validated as part of this study, and recall and compliance was measured by a patient interview, during which responses were compared with the original endoscopy report. SETTING AND PATIENTS: Single university outpatient endoscopy laboratory. Between June and September 2005, 115 patients were randomized, and 83 completed this protocol.
RESULTS: The two groups were equally matched, except the intervention group (received report) was older (54.4 vs 50.7 years; P = .037). Receipt of an endoscopy report reduced postprocedure anxiety (P = .001) and improved recall of findings and recommendations (P = .001 for both). Satisfaction was very high for all patients and was unaffected by receipt of a report. Patients older than 60 years had significantly lower satisfaction scores by approximately 6 points (P = .004). Some subcategories of compliance were significantly better in the intervention group, but there was no effect on the number of patients who complied with all recommendations. LIMITATION: Small number of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The receipt of an endoscopy report at discharge reduces postprocedure anxiety, improves recall of findings and recommendations, and may increase compliance. This inexpensive and safe practice should be routinely adopted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18155431     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.08.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  7 in total

1.  Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy.

Authors:  David Armstrong; Alan Barkun; Ron Bridges; Rose Carter; Chris de Gara; Catherine Dube; Robert Enns; Roger Hollingworth; Donald Macintosh; Mark Borgaonkar; Sylviane Forget; Grigorios Leontiadis; Jonathan Meddings; Peter Cotton; Ernst J Kuipers
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 2.  Factors in quality care--the case of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests--problems in the steps and interfaces of care.

Authors:  Jane Zapka; Stephen H Taplin; Rebecca Anhang Price; Caroline Cranos; Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2010

Review 3.  Patient access to medical records and healthcare outcomes: a systematic review.

Authors:  Traber Davis Giardina; Shailaja Menon; Danielle E Parrish; Dean F Sittig; Hardeep Singh
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 4.  Endoscopy reporting standards.

Authors:  Daphnée Beaulieu; Alan N Barkun; Catherine Dubé; Jill Tinmouth; Pierre Hallé; Myriam Martel
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.522

5.  Emergency physicians' views of direct notification of laboratory and radiology results to patients using the Internet: a multisite survey.

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

6.  Providers' Perceptions of Barriers to Optimal Communication With Patients During the Postcolonoscopy Experience.

Authors:  Travis Hyams; Barbara Curbow; Juliette Christie; Nora Mueller; Evelyn King-Marshall; Shahnaz Sultan; Thomas J George
Journal:  J Patient Exp       Date:  2018-03-23

7.  Standard reporting elements for the performance of EUS: Recommendations from the FOCUS working group.

Authors:  Suqing Li; Marc Monachese; Misbah Salim; Naveen Arya; Anand V Sahai; Nauzer Forbes; Christopher Teshima; Mohammad Yaghoobi; Yen-I Chen; Eric Lam; Paul James
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.628

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.