Dataset Information

Patient satisfaction with outpatient hysteroscopy versus day case hysteroscopy: randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To compare outpatient hysteroscopy with day case hysteroscopy in terms of patient satisfaction and acceptability. SETTING: Gynaecology clinic of a teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 100 women. DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated to outpatient hysteroscopy or day case hysteroscopy provided they had no preference for either procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction rate, requirements for postoperative analgesia, speed of recovery, time away from home, and time off work. RESULTS: The outpatient group recovered preoperative fitness more quickly than the day case group (2 days (range 1-2.7) versus 3 days (2-4), P<0.05). After the procedure, the outpatient group were also fully mobile more quickly than the day case group (0 minutes (0-5) versus 105 minutes (80-120), P<0.001). Requirements for postoperative analgesia were similar in both groups. Overall, 78% of patients considered that the pain from outpatient hysteroscopy was less than that usually experienced during menstruation. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups (83.6% in the outpatient group versus 77.0% in the day case group). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient hysteroscopy and day case hysteroscopy were equally acceptable to patients. Patients recovered significantly more quickly from outpatient hysteroscopy than from day case hysteroscopy.

SUBMITTER: Kremer C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC27273 | biostudies-literature | 2000 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient satisfaction with outpatient hysteroscopy versus day case hysteroscopy: randomised controlled trial.

Kremer C C Duffy S S Moroney M M

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20000101 7230

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare outpatient hysteroscopy with day case hysteroscopy in terms of patient satisfaction and acceptability.<h4>Setting</h4>Gynaecology clinic of a teaching hospital.<h4>Participants</h4>100 women.<h4>Design and interventions</h4>Patients were randomly allocated to outpatient hysteroscopy or day case hysteroscopy provided they had no preference for either procedure.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Satisfaction rate, requirements for postoperative analgesia, speed of recovery, ...[more]

PMID: 10650023

Similar Datasets

Project description:There are no universally accepted guidelines for the follow-up of individuals with cutaneous melanoma. Furthermore, to date, there have been no randomised controlled trials of different models of melanoma follow-up care. This randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effects of GP-led melanoma follow-up on patient satisfaction, follow-up guideline compliance, anxiety and depression, as well as health status.A randomised controlled trial of GP-led follow-up of cutaneous melanoma was conducted over a period of 1 year with assessment by self-completed questionnaires and review of general practice-held medical records at baseline and 12 months later. It took place in 35 general practices in North-east Scotland. Subjects were 142 individuals (51.4% women 48.6% men; mean (s.d.) age 59.2 (15.2) years previously treated for cutaneous melanoma and free of recurrent disease. The intervention consisted of protocol-driven melanoma reviews in primary care, conducted by trained GPs and supported by centralised recall, rapid access pathway to secondary care and a patient information booklet. The main outcome measure was patient satisfaction measured by questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were adherence to guidelines, health status measured by Short Form-36 and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.There were significant improvements in 5 out of 15 aspects of patient satisfaction during the study year in those receiving GP-led melanoma follow-up (all P<or=0.01). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with 7 out of 15 aspects of care at follow-up after adjustment for potential confounders. There was significantly greater adherence to guidelines in the intervention group during the study year. There was no significant difference in health status or anxiety and depression between intervention and control groups at either baseline or outcome.GP-led follow-up is feasible, engenders greater satisfaction in those patients who receive it, permits closer adherence to guidelines and does not result in adverse effects on health status or anxiety and depression when compared with traditional hospital-based follow-up for melanoma.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine whether direct access to hospital review initiated by patients with rheumatoid arthritis would result in improved clinical and psychological outcome, reduced overall use of healthcare resources, and greater satisfaction with care than seen in patients receiving regular review initiated by a rheumatologist.DesignTwo year randomised controlled trial extended to six years.SettingRheumatology outpatient department in teaching hospital.Participants209 consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis for over two years; 68 (65%) in the direct access group and 52 (50%) in the control group completed the study (P = 0.04).Main outcome measuresClinical outcomepain, disease activity, early morning stiffness, inflammatory indices, disability, grip strength, range of movement in joints, and bone erosion. Psychological status: anxiety, depression, helplessness, self efficacy, satisfaction, and confidence in the system. Number of visits to hospital physician and general practitioner for arthritis.ResultsParticipants were well matched at baseline. After six years there was only one significant difference between the two groups for the 14 clinical outcomes measured (deterioration in range of movement in elbow was less in direct access patients). There were no significant differences between groups for median change in psychological status. Satisfaction and confidence in the system were significantly higher in the direct access group at two, four, and six years: confidence 9.8 v 8.4, 9.4 v 8.0, 8.7 v 6.9; satisfaction 9.3 v 8.3, 9.3 v 7.7, 8.9 v 7.1 (all P < 0.02). Patients in the direct access group had 38% fewer hospital appointments (median 8 v 13, P < 0.0001).ConclusionsOver six years, patients with rheumatoid arthritis who initiated their reviews through direct access were clinically and psychologically at least as well as patients having traditional reviews initiated by a physician. They requested fewer appointments, found direct access more acceptable, and had more than a third fewer medical appointments. This radical responsive management could be tested in other chronic diseases.

Project description:Postoperative pain and, in a more extended perspective, quality of recovery (QOR) should be considered the principal endpoints after day surgery. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol are a cornerstone of pain treatment after painful day surgery. Nevertheless, NSAIDs are not always sufficiently effective, have numerous contraindications, and consequently are not suitable in up to 25 % of all patients. Metamizole is a non-opioid compound with a favourable gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular profile compared to NSAIDs. The aim of this study is to assess if a combination of metamizole and paracetamol is non-inferior to a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol in the treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after painful day case surgery. In addition, we aim to assess and compare quality of recovery (QOR) profiles of both groups.This is an investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing elective haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair in a day care setting will be randomised to receive either a combination of metamizole and paracetamol (MP) or a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol (IP). Participants will take study medication orally for 4 days. Primary endpoints are average postoperative pain intensity measured by an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale at postoperative day 1 and QOR profile measured by the Functional Recovery Index (FRI), the 1-item Global Surgical Recovery (GSR) index and the EuroQol (EQ-5D) questionnaire at days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14 and 28 postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include compliance with study medication, adverse effects of study medication, use of rescue medication and satisfaction with study medication, surgery and hospital care and telephone follow-up.This study will provide clinical evidence on the analgesic efficacy and safety of a combination of metamizole and paracetamol in treating postoperative pain at home after painful day surgery. This study may also provide an insight into QOR profile after four different types of surgery and into the interrelationship between three different instruments used to assess QOR.Recruitment is currently ongoing.European Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35 . Registered 10 November 2015.

Project description:Growth of the foreign-born population in the U.S. has led to increasing numbers of limited-English-proficient (LEP) patients. Innovative medical interpreting strategies, including remote simultaneous medical interpreting (RSMI), have arisen to address the language barrier. This study evaluates the impact of interpreting method on patient satisfaction.1,276 English-, Spanish-, Mandarin-, and Cantonese-speaking patients attending the primary care clinic and emergency department of a large New York City municipal hospital were screened for enrollment in a randomized controlled trial. Language-discordant patients were randomized to RSMI or usual and customary (U&C) interpreting. Patients with language-concordant providers received usual care. Demographic and patient satisfaction questionnaires were administered to all participants.541 patients were language-concordant with their providers and not randomized; 371 were randomized to RSMI, 167 of whom were exposed to RSMI; and 364 were randomized to U&C, 198 of whom were exposed to U&C. Patients randomized to RSMI were more likely than those with U&C to think doctors treated them with respect (RSMI 71%, U&C 64%, p < 0.05), but they did not differ in other measures of physician communication/care. In a linear regression analysis, exposure to RSMI was significantly associated with an increase in overall satisfaction with physician communication/care (beta 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.18, scale 0-1.0). Patients randomized to RSMI were more likely to think the interpreting method protected their privacy (RSMI 51%, U&C 38%, p < 0.05). Patients randomized to either arm of interpretation reported less comprehension and satisfaction than patients in language-concordant encounters.While not a substitute for language-concordant providers, RSMI can improve patient satisfaction and privacy among LEP patients. Implementing RSMI should be considered an important component of a multipronged approach to addressing language barriers in health care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The use of feedback has been integral to medical student learning, but rigorous evidence to evaluate its education effect is limited, especially in the role of patient feedback in clinical teaching and practice improvement. The aim of the Patient Teaching Associate (PTA) Feedback Study was to evaluate whether additional written consumer feedback on patient satisfaction improved consultation skills among medical students and whether multisource feedback (MSF) improved student performance. METHODS:In this single site, double-blinded randomised controlled trial, 71 eligible medical students from two universities in their first clinical year were allocated to intervention or control and followed up for one semester. They participated in five simulated student-led consultations in a teaching clinic with patient volunteers living with chronic illness. Students in the intervention group received additional written feedback on patient satisfaction combined with guided self-reflection. The control group received usual immediate formative multisource feedback from tutors, patients and peers. Student characteristics, baseline patient-rated satisfaction scores and tutor-rated consultation skills were measured. RESULTS:Follow-up assessments were complete in 70 students attending the MSF program. At the final consultation episodes, both groups improved patient-rated rapport (P =?0.002), tutor-rated patient-centeredness and tutor-rated overall consultation skills (P =?0.01). The intervention group showed significantly better tutor-rated patient-centeredness (P =?0.003) comparing with the control group. Distress relief, communication comfort, rapport reported by patients and tutor-rated clinical skills did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS:The innovative multisource feedback program effectively improved consultation skills in medical students. Structured written consumer feedback combined with guided student reflection further improved patient-centred practice and effectively enhanced the benefit of an MSF model. This strategy might provide a valuable adjunct to communication skills education for medical students. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number ACTRN12613001055796 .

Project description:Study questionsDoes the application of anti-adhesion gel, compared to no gel, following operative hysteroscopy to treat intrauterine pathology in women wishing to conceive increase the chance of conception leading to live birth?What is known alreadyIntrauterine adhesions (IUAs) following operative hysteroscopy may impair reproductive success in women of reproductive age. Anti-adhesion barrier gels may decrease the occurrence of IUAs, but the evidence on their effectiveness to improve reproductive outcomes is sparse and of low quality.Study design size durationThis multicentre, parallel group, superiority, blinded and pragmatic randomised controlled trial is being carried out in seven participating centres in Belgium. Recruitment started in April 2019. Women will be randomly allocated to treatment with anti-adhesion gel (intervention group) or no gel (control group). Sterile ultrasound gel will be applied into the vagina as a mock-procedure in both treatment arms. The patient, fertility physician and gynaecologist performing the second-look hysteroscopy are unaware of the allocated treatment. Power analysis, based on a target improvement of 15% in conception leading to live birth using anti-adhesion gel, a power of 85%, a significance level of 5%, and a drop-out rate of 10%, yielded a number of 444 patients to be randomised. The baseline rate of conception leading to live birth in the control group is expected to be 45%.Participants/materials setting methodsWomen of reproductive age (18-47?years), wishing to conceive (spontaneously or by fertility treatment) and scheduled for operative hysteroscopy to treat intrauterine pathology (endometrial polyps, myomas with uterine cavity deformation, uterine septa, IUAs or retained products of conception) are eligible for recruitment. Women may try to conceive from 3 to 6?weeks after receiving allocated treatment with follow-up ending at 30?weeks after treatment. If the woman fails to conceive within this timeframe, a second-look hysteroscopy will be scheduled within 2-6?weeks to check for IUAs. The primary endpoint is conception leading to live birth, measured at 30?weeks after randomisation. The secondary endpoints are time to conception, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy rates, measured at 30?weeks after receiving allocated treatment. The long-term follow-up starts when the patient is pregnant and she will be contacted every trimester.Study funding/competing interestsThis work is funded by the Belgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre (KCE). The anti-adhesion gel is supplied at no cost by Nordic Pharma and without conditions. Dr. Tomassetti reports grants and non-financial support from Merck SA, non-financial support from Ferring SA, personal fees and non-financial support from Gedeon-Richter, outside the submitted work. None of the other authors have a conflict of interest.

Dataset Information

Patient satisfaction with outpatient hysteroscopy versus day case hysteroscopy: randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Patient satisfaction with outpatient hysteroscopy versus day case hysteroscopy: randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets