Related Experiment Videos
Efficacy and outcome of an open access endoscopy service
J M Hansen1, P Bytzer, S Bondesen
1Department of Medical Gastroenterology S, Odense Hospital.
Insights
Open access endoscopy significantly altered dyspeptic patient management, with 27% experiencing treatment changes. For young patients with minor findings, endoscopy offered reassurance and reduced consultations, improving outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Gastroenterology
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Dyspeptic patients, particularly younger individuals (<40 years), often have examinations with findings not requiring medical treatment.
- Open access endoscopy's impact on managing dyspepsia requires further elucidation, especially concerning treatment adjustments and patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate how open access endoscopy influences the management of dyspeptic patients.
- To specifically assess outcomes in younger patients (<40 years) undergoing endoscopy.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective questionnaire study involving 436 patients referred for open access endoscopy and their general practitioners.
- Data collected on medical treatment, consultation rates, and global assessment before and 6-18 months post-endoscopy.
Main Results:
- Relevant medical treatment changes occurred in 27% of patients, irrespective of age.
- Endoscopy provided reassurance for 70% of patients with no or minor abnormalities, leading to lower consultation rates and fewer symptoms.
- 83% of young dyspeptic patients (<40 years) with no or minor abnormalities experienced a positive outcome post-endoscopy.
Conclusions:
- Open access endoscopy leads to lasting changes in prescription habits and reduces general practitioner consultation rates, even in younger dyspeptic patients with minor findings.
- The current strategy of trialing H2-receptor antagonists before endoscopy referral warrants formal clinical evaluation.
Abstract:
In a retrospective questionnaire-study, we have attempted to elucidate how open access endoscopy influences management of dyspeptic patients, with special focus on young patients (less than 40 year), since the proportion of examinations with findings not requiring medical treatment are consistently reported higher in this age group. During a one-year period, 436 patients referred for open access endoscopy and their general practitioners completed questionnaires giving details of medical treatment, consultation rate for dyspepsia and global assessment before and 6-18 months after the endoscopy. Relevant changes in medical treatment (stopped in patients with no or minor abnormalities or started in patients with major abnormalities) was found for 27% of the patients, irrespective of age group. The result of the endoscopy provided reassurance for 70% of the patients with no or minor abnormalities. Reassurance was coupled with a lower consultation rate and with fewer symptoms. Altogether, 83% of the young patients with no or minor abnormalities had a positive outcome of the endoscopy. As the endoscopy service introduced relevant and lasting prescription habits and reduced consultation rates at general practitioners, also for younger dyspeptic patients with no or minor abnormalities, the strategy generally proposed of a trial with H2-receptor antagonists before considering referral for endoscopy should be subjected to formal clinical trial evaluating all relevant levels of efficacy.