BACKGROUND: Quality assurance has become an important issue. Many societies are adopting quality assurance programs in order to monitor and improve quality of care. AIM: To assess the opinion of gastroenterologists towards quality assurance on the endoscopy department. METHODS: A survey was sent to all gastroenterologists (n=319) in the Netherlands. It assessed their opinion on a quality assurance program for endoscopy units, including its design, logistics, and content. RESULTS: 200 gastroenterologists (63%) completed the questionnaire. 95% had a positive opinion towards quality assurance and 67% supposed an increase in quality. 28% assumed a negative impact on the time available for patient contact by introducing a quality assurance program and 35% that the capacity would decrease. A negative attitude towards disclosure of results to insurance companies (23%) and media (53%) was reported. Female gastroenterologists were less positive to share the results with other stakeholders (p<0.05). Most important quality measurements were assessment of complications (97%), standardised reporting (96%), and adequate patient information (95%). CONCLUSION: Gastroenterologists have a positive attitude towards quality assurance. However, concerns do exist about time investment and disclosure of results to others. Information provision and procedure characteristics were considered the most important aspects of quality assurance.
BACKGROUND: Quality assurance has become an important issue. Many societies are adopting quality assurance programs in order to monitor and improve quality of care. AIM: To assess the opinion of gastroenterologists towards quality assurance on the endoscopy department. METHODS: A survey was sent to all gastroenterologists (n=319) in the Netherlands. It assessed their opinion on a quality assurance program for endoscopy units, including its design, logistics, and content. RESULTS: 200 gastroenterologists (63%) completed the questionnaire. 95% had a positive opinion towards quality assurance and 67% supposed an increase in quality. 28% assumed a negative impact on the time available for patient contact by introducing a quality assurance program and 35% that the capacity would decrease. A negative attitude towards disclosure of results to insurance companies (23%) and media (53%) was reported. Female gastroenterologists were less positive to share the results with other stakeholders (p<0.05). Most important quality measurements were assessment of complications (97%), standardised reporting (96%), and adequate patient information (95%). CONCLUSION: Gastroenterologists have a positive attitude towards quality assurance. However, concerns do exist about time investment and disclosure of results to others. Information provision and procedure characteristics were considered the most important aspects of quality assurance.