Factors influencing patient satisfaction with GI endoscopy

Yacavone, Robert F.; Locke, G. Richard; Gostout, Christopher J.; Rockwood, Todd; Thieling, Sarah; Zinsmeister, Alan R.

doi:10.1067/mge.2001.115337

Cited by 96 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The instrument was found to be inadequate for assessing endoscopy procedural satisfaction as it did not include all factors necessary for patient satisfaction, especially pain control during and after endoscopy. 51 Other instruments either lack details of validation 52 or have been developed to measure patient satisfaction with care other than that of endoscopy, using in-depth interviews. 12 Although qualitative methods such as in-depth interviews have a role in assessing patient satisfaction, there are important resource implications for both patients and staff.…”

Section: Annex B Development and Validation Of The Gastrointestinal Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…31 Although we considered a modified version of the Group Health Association of America nine-item instrument (mGHAA-9), this has been shown to lack content validity for measuring patient satisfaction with endoscopy. 32 We therefore developed and validated a questionnaire for use in this study. Items known to affect patient satisfaction were identified from the literature.…”

Section: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (Gesq)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Items known to affect patient satisfaction were identified from the literature. 32 A 24-item questionnaire was then developed from the mGHAA-9 with additional items important to patient satisfaction. Content validity was assessed by an expert panel that included expertise in gastroenterology, outcome measurement and psychology.…”

Section: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (Gesq)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What are the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of endoscopy undertaken by nurses when compared with doctors? A Multi-Institution Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET)

Williams¹,

Russell²,

Durai³

et al. 2006

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Contact Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK.We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTA NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he research findings from the NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme directly influence key decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC) who rely on HTA outputs to help raise standards of care. HTA findings also help to improve the quality of the service in the NHS indirectly in that they form a key component of the 'National Knowledge Service' that is being developed to improve the evidence of clinical practice throughout the NHS.The HTA Programme was set up in 1993. Its role is to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined to include all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care, rather than settings of care.The HTA Programme commissions research only on topics where it has identified key gaps in the evidence needed by the NHS. Suggestions for topics are actively sought from people working in the NHS, the public, service-users groups and professional bodies such as Royal Colleges and NHS Trusts.Research suggestions are carefully considered by panels of independent experts (including service users) whose advice results in a ranked list of recommended research priorities. The HTA Programme then commissions the research team best suited to und...

show abstract

Section: Annex B Development and Validation Of The Gastrointestinal Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (Gesq)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (Gesq)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What are the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of endoscopy undertaken by nurses when compared with doctors? A Multi-Institution Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET)

Williams¹,

Russell²,

Durai³

et al. 2006

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A similar study on factors influencing patient satisfaction with gastrointestinal endoscopy by Yacavone et al [4] from the Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota, came to the conclusion that the modified ASGE criteria based on the m-GHAAg criteria had inadequate content validity for endoscopic practice because it does not assess pain control. They found that the technical skill of the endoscopist was of the highest importance, but they did not address the question of how a patient could assess these technical skills.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Satisfaction with Endoscopy Measurement and Assessment

Yanai

Schushan-Eisen

Neuman

et al. 2008

Dig Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several factors could influence patient satisfaction with endoscopy including technical quality of care, comfort and tolerability of the procedure, whether informed consent has been obtained, the level of communication with staff before and after the procedure, and delays in appointments. Aim: To assess what factors should be measured in assessing patient satisfaction by using a 16-point questionnaire based on the informed consent recommendations of the first workshop at Kos, and of the criteria of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and to compare the response of patients with gastroenterologists and the support staff. Method: The questionnaire was answered by 81 patients, 71 gastroenterologists and 36 support staff (nurses and receptionists). It graded the relative importance of different factors which influenced the perception of satisfaction in those undergoing endoscopy. These factors included: the waiting time for appointment, the explanation received at various stages before and after the procedure, the reception process, the importance of premedication against pain and discomfort, privacy and satisfaction related to findings at the procedure. Results: Thirteen of the 16 factors were generally graded as important for patient satisfaction. The finding at endoscopy, a written explanation and the alternatives to the endoscopic procedure were regarded as of lesser importance. Gastroenterologists tended to rate the importance of a written explanation and the explanations from the nurses before and after the procedure lower than did the patients and nursing staff. Conclusions: The courtesy and personal manner of the entire medical staff, as evidenced by the explanation of the procedure by the various physicians before and after and the process of admission, were generally rated of the highest importance. The nurses’ ranking of the various factors was closer to that of the patients than of the gastroenterologists.

show abstract

“…or a trained nurse. They would also like to know the years of experience and technical skills of the endoscopist [6,11] , including personal success and complication rates [12] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Informed Consent: Still Far from Ideal?

Ladas

2006

Digestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Factors influencing patient satisfaction with GI endoscopy

Cited by 96 publications

References 12 publications

What are the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of endoscopy undertaken by nurses when compared with doctors? A Multi-Institution Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET)

What are the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of endoscopy undertaken by nurses when compared with doctors? A Multi-Institution Nurse Endoscopy Trial (MINuET)

Patient Satisfaction with Endoscopy Measurement and Assessment

Informed Consent: Still Far from Ideal?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About