Does open access endoscopy close the door to an adequately informed patient?

Area of Science:

• Gastroenterology
• Patient Care
• Medical Communication

Background:

• Open access endoscopy use is rising.
• Informed consent, procedure acceptance, and result communication for open access endoscopy are under-evaluated.
• Comparison needed between open access and GI subspecialty clinic referrals.

Purpose of the Study:

• Compare pre-procedure knowledge, explanation adequacy, medical complexity, information transfer, and patient satisfaction.
• Evaluate differences between open access endoscopy and gastrointestinal (GI) subspecialty clinic referrals.
• Assess patient understanding and satisfaction with endoscopic procedures.

Main Methods:

• Utilized a 1-page questionnaire for all outpatient endoscopy patients.
• Conducted post-procedure phone interviews with standardized questionnaires for both groups.
• Collected data on procedure knowledge, explanation, satisfaction, and information transfer.

Main Results:

• Open access patients reported significantly less procedural information and explanation (p < 0.01 and p < 0.005).
• No satisfaction difference for procedures under conscious sedation; GI clinic patients more satisfied with unsedated sigmoidoscopy.
• Most patients received results from a gastroenterologist; GI clinic colonoscopy patients felt better post-procedure.

Conclusions:

• Open access endoscopy patients are less informed about their procedures.
• A defined mechanism for communicating endoscopic results to patients is necessary for open access endoscopy.
• Improved patient understanding and communication are crucial for open access endoscopy effectiveness.