A scale to measure the worry level in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy with sedation: Development, reliability, and validity

Objective: This study aims to develop a scale to measure the worry level of patients who will undergo gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy with deep sedation, and to provide scientific references to alleviate their worries. Method: Based on literature review, panel discussion, patient interview and expert consultation, we developed the first version of the scale. After two pre-investigations, the formal version of the scale was formed, and the reliability and validity were tested on 1389 respondents. Reliability was assessed by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the Spearman correlations analysis. Results: The scale was composed of four dimensions: financial and time costs, sedation, examination, and psychology. It has 15 items. Reliability and validity were acceptable. The Cronbach's alpha of the whole scale was 0.959 and all the factor loadings were > 0.50. The Spearman correlations of the inter-dimensions ranged from 0.614 to 0.836, and the correlation coefficients between the dimensions and the total score were 0.795 to 0.957. The correlation coefficient between the total scale score and the APAIS was 0.833. Conclusions: This scale has good validity and reliability, which is useful for physicians and medical institutions to take appropriate measures to reduce patients' worries. (AU)

Effects of visual aid on state anxiety, fear and stress level in patients undergoing endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to calculate the estimated size and confidence interval for the effects of adding visual aid to counselling on anxiety, stress and fear of patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The secondary aim was to calculate confidence interval for endoscopy-related variables that predict which patients are likely to benefit from visual aids. METHOD: In a randomized, single-blind, two arm, parallel group, superiority trial, 232 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo either gastroscopy or colonoscopy were randomly divided into two intervention groups; counselling with video of endoscopic procedure and counselling with no-video (n = 116 in each group). Primary outcome was anxiety and secondary outcomes were stress and fear. RESULTS: One-way ANCOVA showed that there was significant between group differences of anxiety, stress and fear after controlling for the effect of covariates. Planned contrasts revealed that counselling along with visual aid of endoscopy procedure significantly decreased anxiety [Mean difference at post; -4.26 (-4.47, -4.05), p < .001, partial η2 = 0.88], stress [-5.35 (-5.63, -5.07), p < .001, partial η2 = 0.86] and fear [-2.82 (-2.97, -2.67), p < .001, partial η2 = 0.86] compared to counselling alone. Linear regression showed that gender, nature of complaints and concern over seniority of endoscopist were significant negative predictors, however, satisfaction on briefing of endoscopy procedure was significant positive predictor of outcome variables in visual aid condition. CONCLUSION: The increase in anxiety, acute stress and fear related to endoscopic procedures can be alleviated with psychological counselling coupled with visual aids before the procedure. Visual aid could lead to supplementary benefits in reducing anxiety scores. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov Number: NCT05241158. Registered 16/11/2022; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05241158KEY MESSAGESCounselling along with visual aid of endoscopy procedure significantly decreased anxiety, stress and fear as compared to counselling alone.Male patients were less stressed after visual aid intervention as compared to female patients. Patients who had chronic GI symptoms were less stressed after visual aid intervention as compared to those who had acute GI symptoms. Patients who had concern over seniority of endoscopist were less stressed after visual aid intervention as compared to those who had no concerns over seniority.Satisfaction on briefing of endoscopy procedure was significant positive predictor of stress and fear.

Factors Contributing to Non-Attendance of GI Endoscopic Procedures in a Tertiary Care Center in the Middle East.

INTRODUCTION: The cancer burden in the Middle East is high and growing. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer for both men and women in the UAE. Although early diagnosis of malignancy reduces morbidity and increases the survival rates, non-attendance of gastroenterology (GI) endoscopic procedures is a significant global problem, which can lead to delay in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Several factors have been found to contribute to non-attendance behavior, including socioeconomic, cultural, and organizational related barriers. The purpose of this study was to identify factors contributing to non-attendance behavior among outpatients scheduled for GI endoscopic procedures in a tertiary hospital in the United Arab Emirates. We conclude with recommendations that can help in reducing the rate of patient no-shows for GI endoscopic procedures in the region. METHODS: In a tertiary medical center in the Middle East, we surveyed patients who did not attend their scheduled GI endoscopic procedures over a period of one year. The questionnaire sought to identify possible reasons for patient's non-attendance. Descriptive measures including means, standard deviation, frequencies, and percentages were used to analyze the demographic characteristics of the study participants. The chi-square test was performed to analyze gender differences. RESULTS: Of 314 outpatients who met study inclusion criteria, 168 agreed to participate (53.5% response rate). The majority of participants were women (n=96, 60.4 %), aged 18 to 73, with a mean of 42 years. The largest age group was between 35 and 44 (n=46, 28.9 %). Approximately equal numbers of non-attendance appointments were scheduled for combined colonoscopy and upper endoscopy (36.3 %), colonoscopy alone (31.3 %), or upper endoscopy alone (31.3 %). The most common causes for cancellation or non-attendance included concerns about the appointment (35.5%), inconvenient timing of the appointment (27.9%) and changes in medical status (26.4%). Gender differences were noted for non-attendance behaviors, with women significantly more likely than men to report feelings of embarrassment (Chi-square 6.261, df=1, p=.012). CONCLUSION: Our study has identified several barriers to patient attendance of endoscopic procedures, as well as opportunities to reduce the rate of patient no-shows, including patient education, scheduling options, and protocols to minimize discomfort and misconceptions around GI endoscopic procedures, particularly accommodating for same gender endoscopists, with the ultimate goal of increasing early cancer screening and prevention.

Analysis of patients attitude to undergo urgent endoscopic procedures during COVID-19 outbreak in Italy.

We conducted a survey to investigate to what extent the fear of COVID-19 has influenced the patients decision to undergo or to cancel endoscopic procedures. We collected data from 847 patients from 13 centres. The main indication for endoscopy was anemia, followed by pain and unexplained weight loss. The percentage of not presenters progressively increased throughout the three weeks of study, from 15.1% at the beginning to 48.2% at the end. 37 (34.2%) upper GI endoscopies and 112 (56.3 %) colonoscopies showed an organic cause explaining the symptoms presented by the patients, respectively; 5 cases of gastric cancer (4.6%) and 16 cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) (6.0%), respectively, were detected; during the second week the percentage of organic diseases found at upper endoscopy was 19 (33.3%) with 5 cancer (8.7%), and 61 (49.1% ) at colonoscopy, with 2 CRC (1.6%); finally, during the third week the corresponding figures were 19 (48.7%) for upper GI examinations, with 3 gastric cancers (7.7%), and 43 (60.5%) with 4 (6.5%) CRC cases found.We conclude that patients weighted the fear of having a clinically relevant disease with the fear of becoming infected by coronavirus, and a relevant percentage of them (29.4%) decided not to attend the endoscopy suites at the scheduled date.

Effects of audio and visual distraction on patients' vital signs and tolerance during esophagogastroduodenoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) provides an indispensable and unambiguous inspection allowing the discovery upper gastrointestinal lesions. However, many patients are anxious about undergoing EGD. Few studies have investigated the influence on patients' vital signs and tolerance during EGD using subjective and objective assessments. This study was a prospective randomized controlled study that investigated the influence of audio and visual distraction on EGD. METHODS: We randomly divided 289 subjects who underwent EGD into 4 groups (control group, audio group, visual group, combination group) and examined their vital signs, heart rate variability (HRV), psychological items, and acceptance of distraction. RESULTS: Pulse rate (PR) at post-distraction and post-EGD in the 3 distraction groups were significantly lower than those of control group (p <  0.001 and p <  0.01, respectively). Blood pressure (BP) during and post-EGD was significantly higher than that at pre-EGD in control group (p <  0.05), but no significant elevation of BP was observed during the latter half of EGD and post-EGD in the 3 distraction groups. BP at post-distraction improved significantly compared to pre-distraction in the 3 distraction groups (p <  0.05). There was a significant difference in the low-frequency (LF) power/ high-frequency (HF) power at post-distraction and post-EGD among the 4 groups (p <  0.001 and p <  0.001, respectively). The LF power/HF power at post-distraction and post-EGD in the 3 distraction groups was significantly lower than that in control group (p <  0.05). Several items of profile of mood states (POMS) and the impression of EGD at post-distraction improved significantly compared to those at pre-distraction among the 3 distraction groups (p <  0.05). Visual analog scale (VAS) of willingness for the next use of distraction in the 3 distraction groups was excellent because VAS was more than 70. CONCLUSIONS: Distractions effectively improved psychological factors, vital signs and some of HRV at pre and post-EGD. Distractions may suppress BP elevation during the latter half of EGD and lead to stability of HRV on EGD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This prospective trial was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000029637. Registered on 20 October 2017.

Pre-endoscopic tachycardia predicts increased sedation dose and lower adenoma detection rate in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures: a case control study.

BACKGROUND: Tachycardia prior to endoscopic procedures is commonly encountered which reflect patient anxiety status. Despite this frequent occurrence, it is unclear if in a patient with tachycardia sedation dose should be modified. The aim of our study was to assess the effect of pre-endoscopic tachycardia on sedation dose. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent upper endoscopy and colonoscopy at EMMS Nazareth hospital were performed. We excluded patients with diseases and medications affecting the heart rate. RESULTS: A total of 2855 patients were included in the study. Two-hundred and thirty-seven patients had tachycardia before endoscopy (8.3%, group A) as compared to 2618 (group B) patients who had heart rate ≤100 beats per minute. The mean dosage of propofol in group A was significantly higher (62.6±33.2 mg vs. 57.4±29.9 mg) than in group B (P=0.01). There was no difference in the cecal intubation rate among the two groups (P=0.9). Notably, the adenoma detection rate was significantly lower among group A patients as compared to group B (13.6% vs. 22.8%, P=0.02) patients. There were no sedation related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Tachycardia prior to endoscopic procedures was associated with higher sedative dosage and lower adenoma detection rate, however no major complications were recorded. These data should be taken into consideration to optimize procedure quality.

Psychological outcomes following surgical and endoscopic bariatric procedures: A systematic review.

Obesity is a leading global epidemic. Bariatric surgery is the only treatment demonstrating substantial long-term weight loss and medical benefits. However, there is limited research on the psychological outcomes following surgery. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to systematically review depression, anxiety, and binge eating outcomes at different time points following bariatric surgery and identify whether bariatric surgery significantly reduces psychological symptoms over time. These outcomes were also examined among endoscopic bariatric procedures as a secondary aim. Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Findings suggested that most patients experience a short-term reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms from pre-surgery. Over time, however, these symptoms increase and may even return to pre-surgery levels. Furthermore, while binge eating was uncommon after surgery, other disordered eating patterns may emerge. Binge eating may also restart over time as the stomach enlarges again. Overall, the complex psychological difficulties faced by individuals with obesity continue after surgery and may contribute to longer-term weight recidivism. More comprehensive and standardised psychological assessment procedures, including clinical interviews and longer-term follow-up, may provide insight into the psychological mechanisms maintaining weight management issues, and may serve as a starting point for improving the long-term success of patients with obesity.

Prevalence of burnout syndrome in gastroenterologists and endoscopists: results of a national survey in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Burnout syndrome (BOS) is characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment. It affects doctors, patients and their inter-relationship. There is a lack of data on BOS in Mexico. The main objective of the present study is to evaluate the prevalence of BOS in physician members of the Mexican gastroenterological association (MGA) and Mexican association for gastrointestinal endoscopy (MAGE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cross sectional, prospective study through anonymous electronic survey via e-mail, sent to members of the MGA (n = 1192) and MAGE (n = 600). The survey included questions about basic sociodemographic information, Maslach Burnout Inventory, and factors potentially associated with BOS. Continuous variables were summarized as means and ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare groups. Nominal variables were summarized as proportions and Fisher's exact test or Χ2 test were used, as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 1792 e-mail invitations were delivered and 411 answers were received with a response rate of 22.9%. The prevalence of BOS according to the Maslach Burnout Inventory was 26.3% (108/411). The prevalence of BOS according to the single-item self-defined burnout question (SISDBOQ) was 32.6% (134/411). The Kappa coefficient for emotional exhaustion between the SISDBOQ and Maslach inventory was 0.48 (p = 0.0001). Factors associated with BOS included performing endoscopic procedures (OR 2.9 (1.2-6.6); p = 0.008), lack of support from colleagues upon complications (OR 0.2 (0.1-0.4); p = 0.0001), receiving frequent reprimands from superiors (OR 2.4 (1.5-3.8); p = 0.0001), work unrelated to medicine (OR 2.4 (1.4-3.9); p = 0.0001), work violence/harassment (OR 3.0 (1.9-4.9); p = 0.0001) and living in a big city (OR 1.9 (1.2-3); p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: BOS is a frequent entity in Mexican gastroenterologists and endoscopists. There are potentially modifiable factors associated with BOS.

The influence of various distractions prior to upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Although many patients still have anxiety about upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, there have been few reports on the influence of distractions for a person who is going to undergo upper GI endoscopy soon. This study was a prospective randomized controlled study investigating the influence of distractions, such as auditive and visual distractions using subjective and objective assessments including autonomic nervous function prior to upper GI endoscopy. METHODS: 206 subjects who underwent upper GI endoscopy as regular health check-ups were divided randomly into 4 groups prior to upper GI endoscopy; group 1 (control group), group 2 (auditive group), group 3 (visual group), and group 4 (combination group). We measured vital signs, autonomic nervous function, profile of mood state (POMS), and the impression for upper GI endoscopy pre- and post-distraction in the 4 groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in vital signs between 5 and 15 min after sitting in group 1, however, several vital signs in all distraction groups improved significantly after distraction (Pulse rate (P): p <  0.001 in group 4; blood pressure: p <  0.05 in group 2, 3, 4) and the rate of decrease in P and diastolic blood pressure was highest in group 4 (p <  0.001). Several scores of POMS and the impression for upper GI endoscopy post-distraction improved significantly compared to pre-distraction between distraction groups and the satisfaction for distraction was highest in group 4 (p <  0.01). Regarding autonomic nerve function, the low- frequency power/ high- frequency power ratio post-distraction was significantly lower than that pre-distraction in all distraction groups (p <  0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although auditive distraction alone and visual distraction alone were effective, a combination distraction was more effective than any other distraction by subjective and objective assessments. These distractions, which were simple and safe, may play an assistive role in the stability of physical and psychological conditions prior to upper GI endoscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000022801 . Registered on 10 July 2016.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy satisfaction questionnaire is a valid tool to measure patient satisfaction in Asian country.

Patient satisfaction is a key quality indicator of gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE). The gastrointestinal endoscopy satisfaction questionnaire (GESQ) was recently developed to assess patient satisfaction undergoing GIE in Europe; however, it was not validated in Asian countries. We aimed to translate and validate the GESQ in Korea and identify predictors for patient satisfaction during GIE.Translation of the original GESQ was performed according to accepted linguistic validation guidelines. Between March 2016 and July 2016, 350 consecutive patients were asked to complete a GESQ after GIE at Kyung Hee University Hospital. Total sum of scores was transformed from 0 to 100 by the formula: (Score-lowest possible/Score range) × 100.Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses for construct validation reconfirmed that 4 factors were extracted from the Korean GESQ. Internal consistency reliability was acceptable with an overall Cronbach α score of 0.87. Female and nonsmoker were associated with less satisfaction with GIE (P = .021 and .006, respectively). Other factors, including age, alcohol, education or economic level, sedative endoscopy, gastroscopy with or without colonoscopy, experience of previous endoscopy, and additional examinations such as biopsy, were not associated with patient satisfaction during GIE.The Korean version of the GESQ was a valid and acceptable tool to measure satisfaction in patients who had undergone a GIE in Korea. Patient satisfaction measurement could contribute to systematic improvement of qualified GIE.

Study of ideal topical pharyngeal anesthesia in upper gastrointestinal system endoscopy: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study is designed to determine which drug forms provide ideal pharyngeal anesthesia when used during upper gastrointestinal system endoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 180 patients were included in the study. Using the random number table, these patients were divided into three groups. Group 1, lidocaine gel+isotonic spray; Group 2, base lubricant gel+lidocaine spray; and Group 3: lidocaine gel+lidocaine spray. Data were collected from the patient identification form, compliance to operation form, and State Anxiety Inventory. RESULTS: Anesthetization and compliance to procedure scores were higher and anxiety scores were lower in Group 3 than in other groups (p<0.05). It was observed that as the compliance score increased, the anesthetization and satisfaction scores also increased; however, coughing during the procedure, duration of the procedure, and anxiety scores decreased (p<0.05). It was determined that as anesthetization scores increased, discomfort in the throat caused by the device, coughing during the procedure, and anxiety scores decreased (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Lidocaine gel and spray combination is the most ideal pharyngeal anesthesia to ensure the adaptation of the patient to the procedure and to decrease anxiety and discomfort during the procedure.

Screening adherence and cancer risk perceptions in colorectal cancer survivors with Lynch-like syndrome.

Cancer screening recommendations for patients with Lynch-like syndrome (LLS) are not well defined. We evaluated adherence to Lynch syndrome (LS) screening recommendations, cancer risk perceptions, and communication within the families among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors with LLS. Thirty-four participants with LLS completed a questionnaire about risk perception, adherence to LS screening recommendations, and communication with relatives. Clinical data were obtained from medical records. Most participants (76%) believed they should undergo colonoscopy every 1-2 years. Only 41% correctly interpreted their genetic tests as uninformative negative or as variant of unknown significance for LS. Less than half had had an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for screening purpose. Among female participants, 86% had been screened for endometrial cancer (EC) and 71% for ovarian cancer. Most participants had informed relatives about the CRC diagnosis and advised them to undergo CRC screening, but only 50% advised female relatives to be screened for EC and only one-third advised relatives to have genetic counseling. Most CRC survivors with LLS follow the same cancer screening recommended for LS patients but do not understand the meaning of LLS. Greater care must be devoted to communicating the implications of nondiagnostic germline mutation testing among patients with LLS.

Effective communication enhances the patients' endoscopy experience.

BACKGROUND: Undergoing an endoscopy is a stressful experience for patients. AIMS: To audit the endoscopy pathway to improve patient satisfaction. METHODS: A prospective survey of endoscopy patients to identify system improvements that were then implemented. RESULTS: The survey was performed before (N = 71) and after (N = 60) process improvements identified by the initial survey. Information provision and staff communication skills were identified for optimisation. Patient anxiety at home was significantly reduced (median 2 vs. 1, p < 0.01). Education of endoscopy staff significantly improved the quality of information provided before and after the procedure with regard to sedation (median 4 vs. 5, p < 0.01), discomfort (median 4 vs. 5, p < 0.01), complications (28 vs. 82 %, p < 0.01), findings (89 vs. 100 %, p < 0.01) and follow-up (73 vs. 90 %, p = 0.015). Gloucester Comfort Scores during endoscopy improved (median 1 vs. 0, p < 0.01) without increasing sedation levels. Patient feelings of invasion/trauma significantly decreased. Overall 95 % of patients were satisfied. CONCLUSION: Structured information leaflets and improved staff communication skills reduce anxiety and enhance patients' experiences. They are now standard operating procedures.

Room for Quality Improvement in Endoscopist-Directed Sedation: Results from the First Nationwide Survey in Korea.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study sought to characterize the current sedation practices of Korean endoscopists in real-world settings. METHODS: All active members of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy were invited to complete an anonymous 35-item questionnaire. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 22.7% (1,332/5,860). Propofol-based sedation was the dominant method used in both elective esophagogastroduodenoscopy (55.6%) and colonoscopy (52.6%). The mean satisfaction score for propofol-based sedation was significantly higher than that for standard sedation in both examinations (all p<0.001). The use of propofol was supervised exclusively by endoscopists (98.6%). Endoscopists practicing in nonacademic settings, gastroenterologists, or endoscopists with. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopist-directed propofol administration is the predominant sedation method used in Korea. This survey strongly suggests that there is much room for quality improvement regarding sedation training and patient vigilance in endoscopist-directed sedation.

[Evaluation of endoscopic live case demonstrations--the patient's and participant's perspective]. / Beurteilung von endoskopischen Liveübertragungen aus Sicht von Patienten und Teilnehmer.

INTRODUCTION: Benefits and ethics of live demonstrations of endoscopic interventions as part of educational meetings are controversial. Of particular importance is the acceptance and satisfaction of patients treated and the opinion of the participants of the courses. METHODS: A validated questionnaire was sent to all patients who were treated in live demonstrations at the Düsseldorf International Endoscopy Symposium (DIES) in the years 2008-2014. In addition, all participants completed evaluation forms of the same events were evaluated in order to determine the benefits of live performances. The assessments were carried out with evaluations 1-6 (1=very good, 6=very poor). RESULTS: Of 174 patients, 76 written questionnaires were returned, of which 70 were evaluable (40.2%). The rate of satisfaction with the course of treatment and stay in the endoscopy department was 80.8%. The vast majority of patients (84.1%) did not feel that a wrong treatment option was chosen, and only a few (6.7%) questioned the expertise of the treating physician. 83% of respondents felt also at the nurses in good hands. For three-quarters of patients surveyed (74.3%), the quality of life has improved as a result of the measures in the live demonstrations. Of 10,004 participants of the symposia, 6770 evaluation forms were filled out. Mean scores of below 2 were rated for questions about the quality of patient care from a medical and ethical point of view as well as for questions about the learning effect through live demonstrations compared to canned videos. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of patients treated within live demonstrations as part of the DIES is satisfied with the course, treatment and patient care and outcomes. Congress participants assess the educational value of the live broadcasts as well as patient care in medical and ethical terms as good to very good.

Development and validation of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ).

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Patient satisfaction is a key indicator of the quality of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a specific patient satisfaction questionnaire for patients undergoing GI endoscopy--the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed and validated the GESQ within the context of a national multi-institution nurse endoscopy trial, based in secondary care, in three stages: (1) item generation with a panel of patients and professionals following a detailed literature review to identify the most relevant items from existing scales; (2) development and piloting of a draft questionnaire on a sample of patients referred for GI endoscopy; and (3) testing of the questionnaire within a large multicenter pragmatic randomized trial. We undertook psychometric analysis of the questionnaire to identify the underlying dimensions and assessed the questionnaire for reliability and validity. RESULTS: The final version of the GESQ contains 21 items. Principal components analysis revealed four subscales with high internal consistency: skills and hospital (seven items; Cronbach's alpha 0.83), pain and discomfort during and after endoscopy (four items; Cronbach's alpha 0.84), information before endoscopy (five items; Cronbach's alpha 0.80), and information after endoscopy (five items; Cronbach's alpha 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The four identified subscales are clinically relevant and correspond to domains of patient satisfaction identified in previous studies. Our development and validation of the GESQ confirmed that it is a valid, reliable, interpretable, and acceptable tool to measure satisfaction in patients who have undergone a GI endoscopy.

Does anxiety or waiting time influence patients' tolerance of upper endoscopy?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopy is an essential and very commonly used procedure for the evaluation of a multitude of gastrointestinal symptoms. Although it is increasingly required, patients often wait on arrival at the endoscopy unit until they are called for the procedure. It is not clear whether or not this waiting time may have an impact on patient's tolerance during upper endoscopy. Our study attempts to address this. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied consecutive outpatients who underwent endoscopy from September to December, 2013. Gender, age, body mass index (BMI), previous endoscopic experiences, antidepressant therapy, and the time interval between arrival at the endoscopy unit and the onset of examination was recorded. Anxiety before the procedure, pain, and discomfort were rated by a numeric rating scale (0 = no pain/discomfort encountered to 10 = extremely painful/uncomfortable). RESULTS: One hundred and five consecutive outpatients (male = 52; mean age = 45.3 years; age range = 20-86 years) were included in the study. The mean BMI was 25 ± 4.8; mean waiting time from registration to the procedure was  172 min (time range = 30 - 375 mins). Mean patients' pre-examination anxiety level was 3 ± 3.84, mean discomfort score was 4.3 ± 3.09 and mean pain score was 3.4 ± 3.03. The level of pain and discomfort was significantly higher in patients with higher levels of pre-procedure anxiety. No differences were found in terms of anxiety, pain and discomfort among patients divided according to waiting time. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, waiting time does not have a significant impact on the perception of pain and discomfort related to the endoscopic procedure. On the other hand, high pre-procedural levels of anxiety were associated with a low tolerance. Further multicenter randomized trials are needed to clarify the impact of waiting time.

Effect of Structured Teaching Programme on Knowledge, Anxiety and Behavioural Response of Patients Undergoing Endoscopy at a Tertiary Care Hospital.

Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is a common OPD procedure carried out for diagnostic as well as therapeutic purpose. Limited time for interaction between patients and health workers leads to increased anxiety among patients. This study was carried among 50 patients undergoing planned, diagnostic upper GI endoscopy for the first time at a tertiary care hospital. A pre-experimental study was conducted using single group pre-test post-test design. On the day of appointment, their socio-demographic data, baseline knowledge and anxiety levels were assessed using the structured questionnaire and the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory. The patients were then imparted structured teaching programme on the various aspects of upper GI endoscopy using video, flash cards and flip charts and a pamphlet for later reference. On the day of the procedure, their knowledge and anxiety levels were reassessed using the same tool. The patients were provided another session of structured teaching programme using the same AV aids. The behavioural responses of the patients were then observed during the procedure using an observation checklist. Statistical analysis revealed that the knowledge score of the patients increased significantly following the structured teaching (p <0.0001). The mean pre-test anxiety score decreased significantly following the intervention (p<0.0001), only 4 percent had extreme responses like grabbing the endoscope and not maintaining the position.

Satisfaction in open access versus traditional referral for upper endoscopy in children.

OBJECTIVES: In traditional access endoscopy (TAE), patients are booked for endoscopy following a gastroenterology clinic assessment. In contrast, open access endoscopy (OAE) patients are seen for the first time on the day of the procedure, providing same day procedural consent. Controversy exists over the use of OAE in adults, both with the consent process and with patient satisfaction. No literature exists describing satisfaction with OAE in pediatrics. We therefore aimed to assess pediatric patient and caregiver satisfaction in OAE compared with TAE. METHODS: Consecutive pediatric patients, and their caregivers, undergoing elective upper endoscopy from May to December 2012 at the Stollery Children's Hospital (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) were consented for a cross-sectional survey. Seven preprocedure and 5 postprocedure questions were completed regarding mood and satisfaction with the wait time and the information provided. Group demographics and endoscopy wait times were collected. RESULTS: Median wait time with OAE was less compared with TAE (57 days vs 196 days, P < 0.001). OAE patients reported worse mood preprocedure than TAE patients (35.3% vs 10.7%, P = 0.046). OAE caregivers and patients reported more mood disturbance if required to wait longer for endoscopy by attending clinic preprocedure (OAE caregivers 62.2%, OAE patients 64.7%). CONCLUSIONS: OAE is associated with worse preendoscopy patient mood; however, children and caregivers seem concerned about longer wait times associated with TAE. Given the significantly shorter wait times in OAE, identifying methods to minimize present limitations of OAE will be useful to improve clinical practices in pediatric gastroenterology.