Literature DB >> 32419912

Patient experience of gastrointestinal endoscopy: informing the development of the Newcastle ENDOPREM™.

Laura J Neilson1,2, Joanne Patterson2,3, Christian von Wagner4, Paul Hewitson5, Lesley M McGregor6, Linda Sharp7, Colin J Rees1,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Measuring patient experience is important for evaluating the quality of patient care, identifying aspects requiring improvement and optimising patient outcomes. Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) should, ideally, be patient derived, however no such PREMs for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy exist. This study explored the experiences of patients undergoing GI endoscopy and CT colonography (CTC) in order to: identify aspects of care important to them; determine whether the same themes are relevant across investigative modalities; develop the framework for a GI endoscopy PREM.
METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years who had undergone oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD), colonoscopy or CTC for symptoms or surveillance (but not within the national bowel cancer screening programme) in one hospital were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Recruitment continued until data saturation. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.
RESULTS: 35 patients were interviewed (15 OGD, 10 colonoscopy, 10 CTC). Most patients described their experience chronologically, and five 'procedural stages' were evident: before attending for the test; preparing for the test; at the hospital, before the test; during the test; after the test. Six themes were identified: anxiety; expectations; choice & control; communication & information; comfort; embarrassment & dignity. These were present for all three procedures but not all procedure stages. Some themes were inter-related (eg, expectations & anxiety; communication & anxiety).
CONCLUSION: We identified six key themes encapsulating patient experience of GI procedures and these themes were evident for all procedures and across multiple procedure stages. These findings will be used to inform the development of the Newcastle ENDOPREM™. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; colonoscopy; endoscopy; gastroscopy

Year:  2020        PMID: 32419912      PMCID: PMC7223270          DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2019-101321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol        ISSN: 2041-4137


  37 in total

1.  Measuring patients' experiences and outcomes.

Authors:  Nick Black; Crispin Jenkinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-07-02

2.  Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality.

Authors:  Rebecca Anhang Price; Marc N Elliott; Alan M Zaslavsky; Ron D Hays; William G Lehrman; Lise Rybowski; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.929

3.  The ERCP quality network benchmarking project: a preliminary comparison of practice in UK and USA.

Authors:  Kofi W Oppong; Joseph Romagnuolo; Peter B Cotton
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-05-01

4.  Readability of endoscopy information leaflets: Implications for informed consent.

Authors:  Matthew C Mason; James M L Williamson
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Development and validation of a nurse-assessed patient comfort score for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Alaa Rostom; Erin D Ross; Catherine Dubé; Matthew D Rutter; Thomas Lee; Roland Valori; Ronald J Bridges; Darlene Pontifex; Veronica Webbink; Colin Rees; Carly Brown; Deborah H Whetter; Susan G Kelsey; Robert J Hilsden
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Factors Associated with Anxiety About Colonoscopy: The Preparation, the Procedure, and the Anticipated Findings.

Authors:  L A Shafer; J R Walker; C Waldman; C Yang; V Michaud; C N Bernstein; L Hathout; J Park; J Sisler; G Restall; K Wittmeier; H Singh
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-01-13       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Water Exchange Is the Least Painful Colonoscope Insertion Technique and Increases Completion of Unsedated Colonoscopy.

Authors:  Sergio Cadoni; Přemysl Falt; Paolo Gallittu; Mauro Liggi; Donatella Mura; Vit Smajstrla; Matteo Erriu; Felix W Leung
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 11.382

8.  A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness.

Authors:  Cathal Doyle; Laura Lennox; Derek Bell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  Instruments to measure patient experience of healthcare quality in hospitals: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michelle Beattie; Douglas J Murphy; Iain Atherton; William Lauder
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2015-07-23

Review 10.  What do patients want from their endoscopy experience? The importance of measuring and understanding patient attitudes to their care.

Authors:  M Tierney; R Bevan; C J Rees; T M Trebble
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-03
View more
  12 in total

1.  UEG Week 2020 Poster Presentations.

Authors: 
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.623

2.  Improving safety and reducing error in endoscopy (ISREE): a survey of UK services.

Authors:  Srivathsan Ravindran; Paul Bassett; Tim Shaw; Michael Dron; Raphael Broughton; Helen Griffiths; Dimple Keen; Eleanor Wood; Chris J Healey; John Green; Hutan Ashrafian; Ara Darzi; Mark Coleman; Siwan Thomas-Gibson
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-08-19

3.  Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: how low can we go?

Authors:  Colin Rees; E Dekker
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-06-07

4.  Comparison of patient tolerance and acceptability of magnet-controlled capsule endoscopy and flexible endoscopy in the investigation of dyspepsia.

Authors:  Foong Way David Tai; Hey Long Ching; Marion Sloan; Reena Sidhu; Mark McAlindon
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2022-06-10

Review 5.  Patient-Reported Experience Measures for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Ethnography.

Authors:  Annica Rosvall; Magdalena Annersten Gershater; Christine Kumlien; Ervin Toth; Malin Axelsson
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-19

Review 6.  A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer prevention and diagnosis.

Authors:  Mark A Hull; Colin J Rees; Linda Sharp; Sara Koo
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 7.  Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance for Non-Hereditary High-Risk Groups-Is It Time for a Re-Think?

Authors:  James S Hampton; Linda Sharp; Dawn Craig; Colin J Rees
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-01-05

Review 8.  The Newcastle ENDOPREM™: a validated patient reported experience measure for gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Authors:  Laura J Neilson; Linda Sharp; Joanne M Patterson; Christian von Wagner; Paul Hewitson; Lesley M McGregor; Colin J Rees
Journal:  BMJ Open Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-10

9.  Development and validation of a patient-reported scale for tolerability of endoscopic procedures using conscious sedation.

Authors:  Nauzer Forbes; Millie Chau; Hannah F Koury; B Cord Lethebe; Zachary L Smith; Sachin Wani; Rajesh N Keswani; B Joseph Elmunzer; John T Anderson; Steven J Heitman; Robert J Hilsden
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Patient experiences of the urgent cancer referral pathway-Can the NHS do better? Semi-structured interviews with patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer.

Authors:  Anna Haste; Mark Lambert; Linda Sharp; Richard Thomson; Sarah Sowden
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.