Literature DB >> 20669075

Patient satisfaction with on-demand sedation for outpatient colonoscopy.

B Seip1, M Bretthauer, S Dahler, J Friestad, G Huppertz-Hauss, O Høie, E Kittang, S Nyhus, J Pallenschat, P Sandvei, A Stallemo, M V Svendsen, G Hoff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: To reduce the costs of colonoscopy the feasibility of unsedated procedures has been explored. The aims of our study were to assess patient satisfaction with on-demand sedation and identify factors related to painful colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Norwegian Gastronet quality assurance documentation tools consist of endoscopy reports (completed on site) and a patient satisfaction questionnaire (completed by the patient on the day after colonoscopy). Data were collected from January 1 2004 to December 31 2006. Colonoscopies reported to be moderately or severely painful were defined as "painful colonoscopy."
RESULTS: Nine endoscopy centers representing 86 endoscopists reported 14 915 examinations and 12 354 patient reports were returned (83 % response rate). Patient satisfaction with service and information given was greater than 95 % for all centers. Mean rate of painful colonoscopy was 34 % and mean sedation rate 34 %. Odds ratio (OR) for painful colonoscopy was 2.2 ( P < 0.001) when sedation was given. The ORs for painful colonoscopy were similar for all but one center (no. 4) with OR 1.6 ( P = 0.04), while the OR for giving sedation was higher for all but one center (no. 1) compared with the reference center (ORs 2.2 to 7.5, all P-values < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: A surprisingly high rate of painful colonoscopy was found. High sedation rates were not associated with low rates of painful colonoscopy. Recommending increased sedation rates as the only intervention to improve suboptimal performance might not lead to lower rates of painful colonoscopy. (c) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart . New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20669075     DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1255612

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  13 in total

1.  Unsedated colonoscopy: A neverending story.

Authors:  Vittorio Terruzzi; Silvia Paggi; Arnaldo Amato; Franco Radaelli
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-04-16

Review 2.  Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative.

Authors:  Michal F Kaminski; Siwan Thomas-Gibson; Marek Bugajski; Michael Bretthauer; Colin J Rees; Evelien Dekker; Geir Hoff; Rodrigo Jover; Stepan Suchanek; Monika Ferlitsch; John Anderson; Thomas Roesch; Rolf Hultcranz; Istvan Racz; Ernst J Kuipers; Kjetil Garborg; James E East; Maciej Rupinski; Birgitte Seip; Cathy Bennett; Carlo Senore; Silvia Minozzi; Raf Bisschops; Dirk Domagk; Roland Valori; Cristiano Spada; Cesare Hassan; Mario Dinis-Ribeiro; Matthew D Rutter
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 3.  Water-Assisted Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sergio Cadoni; Felix W Leung
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03

4.  Patient comfort and quality in colonoscopy.

Authors:  Vivian E Ekkelenkamp; Kevin Dowler; Roland M Valori; Paul Dunckley
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Comparison of double pants with single pants on satisfaction with colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sook Hee Chung; Soo Jung Park; Jong Suk Hong; Jee Young Hwang; Sin Ae Lee; Kyung Ran Kim; Hye Sun Lee; Sung Pil Hong; Jae Hee Cheon; Tae Il Kim; Won Ho Kim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Comparison of Water Immersion Versus Air Insufflation Colonoscopy Under Various Bowel Preparation Conditions.

Authors:  Sijia Niu; Youlin Yang; Guoyin Shang; Yingying Chen; Zhibin Ma; Feng Wu; Huichao Zhang
Journal:  Turk J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.852

7.  Gastronet survey on the use of one- or two-person technique for colonoscopy insertion.

Authors:  Geir Hoff; Moritz Volker; Michael Bretthauer; Lars Aabakken; Ole Høie; Thomas Delange; Ingrid Berset; Øystein Kjellevold; Tom Glomsaker; Gert Huppertz-Hauss; Ove Lange; Per Sandvei
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 8.  Expert opinions and scientific evidence for colonoscopy key performance indicators.

Authors:  Colin J Rees; Roisin Bevan; Katharina Zimmermann-Fraedrich; Matthew D Rutter; Douglas Rex; Evelien Dekker; Thierry Ponchon; Michael Bretthauer; Jaroslaw Regula; Brian Saunders; Cesare Hassan; Michael J Bourke; Thomas Rösch
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2016-10-08       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  How to improve patient satisfaction during midazolam sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy?

Authors:  Eun Hyo Jin; Kyoung Sup Hong; Young Lee; Ji Yeon Seo; Ji Min Choi; Jaeyoung Chun; Sang Gyun Kim; Joo Sung Kim; Hyun Chae Jung
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Study on the influence of assistant experience on the quality of colonoscopy: A pilot single-center study.

Authors:  Lixia Fu; Mugen Dai; Junwei Liu; Hua Shi; Jundi Pan; Yanmei Lan; Miaoxia Shen; Xiaoduo Shao; Bin Ye
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.