BACKGROUND: Current quality improvement tools for endoscopy services, such as the Global Rating Scale (GRS), emphasize the need for patient-centred care. However, there are no studies that have investigated patient expectations and/or perceptions of quality indicators in endoscopy services. OBJECTIVES: To identify quality indicators for colonoscopy services from the patient perspective; to rate indicators of importance; to determine factors that influence indicator ratings; and to compare the identified indicators with those of the GRS. METHODS: A two-phase mixed methods study was undertaken in Montreal (Quebec), Calgary (Alberta) and Hamilton (Ontario) among patients ≥18 years of age who spoke and read English or French. In phase 1, focus group participants identified quality indicators that were then used to construct a survey questionnaire. In phase 2, survey questionnaires, which were completed immediately after colonoscopy, prompted respondents to rate the 20 focus group-derived indicators according to their level of importance (low, medium, high) and to list up to nine additional items. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors that influenced focus group-derived indicator ratings. Patient-identified indicators were compared with those used in the GRS to identify novel indicators. RESULTS: Three quality indicator themes were identified by 66 participants in 12 focus groups: communication, comfort and service environment. Of the 828 surveys distributed, 402 (48.6%) were returned and 65% of focus group-derived indicators were rated highly important by at least 55% of survey respondents. Indicator ratings differed according to age, sex, site and perceived colorectal cancer risk. Of the 29 patient-identified indicators, 17 (58.6%) were novel. CONCLUSIONS: Patients identified 17 novel quality indicators, suggesting that patients and health professionals differ in their perspectives with respect to quality in colonoscopy services.
BACKGROUND: Current quality improvement tools for endoscopy services, such as the Global Rating Scale (GRS), emphasize the need for patient-centred care. However, there are no studies that have investigated patient expectations and/or perceptions of quality indicators in endoscopy services. OBJECTIVES: To identify quality indicators for colonoscopy services from the patient perspective; to rate indicators of importance; to determine factors that influence indicator ratings; and to compare the identified indicators with those of the GRS. METHODS: A two-phase mixed methods study was undertaken in Montreal (Quebec), Calgary (Alberta) and Hamilton (Ontario) among patients ≥18 years of age who spoke and read English or French. In phase 1, focus group participants identified quality indicators that were then used to construct a survey questionnaire. In phase 2, survey questionnaires, which were completed immediately after colonoscopy, prompted respondents to rate the 20 focus group-derived indicators according to their level of importance (low, medium, high) and to list up to nine additional items. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors that influenced focus group-derived indicator ratings. Patient-identified indicators were compared with those used in the GRS to identify novel indicators. RESULTS: Three quality indicator themes were identified by 66 participants in 12 focus groups: communication, comfort and service environment. Of the 828 surveys distributed, 402 (48.6%) were returned and 65% of focus group-derived indicators were rated highly important by at least 55% of survey respondents. Indicator ratings differed according to age, sex, site and perceived colorectal cancer risk. Of the 29 patient-identified indicators, 17 (58.6%) were novel. CONCLUSIONS:Patients identified 17 novel quality indicators, suggesting that patients and health professionals differ in their perspectives with respect to quality in colonoscopy services.
Authors: L A Ries; P A Wingo; D S Miller; H L Howe; H K Weir; H M Rosenberg; S W Vernon; K Cronin; B K Edwards Journal: Cancer Date: 2000-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Shoshanna Sofaer; Christine Crofton; Elizabeth Goldstein; Elizabeth Hoy; Jenny Crabb Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: R M Tamblyn; P J McLeod; M Abrahamowicz; J Monette; D C Gayton; L Berkson; W D Dauphinee; R M Grad; A R Huang; L M Isaac Journal: CMAJ Date: 1994-06-01 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Bernard Candas; Gilles Jobin; Catherine Dubé; Mario Tousignant; Anis Ben Abdeljelil; Sonya Grenier; Marie-Pierre Gagnon Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2015-12-15
Authors: Jessica U Ramlakhan; Angel M Foster; Sherry L Grace; Courtney R Green; Donna E Stewart; Anna R Gagliardi Journal: Int J Equity Health Date: 2019-11-26
Authors: Alicia Brotons; Mercedes Guilabert; Francisco Javier Lacueva; José Joaquín Mira; Blanca Lumbreras; María Dolores Picó; Julián Vitaller; Mariana Fe García-Sepulcre; Germán Belda; Javier Sola-Vera Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 3.390