Dataset Information

Would you have laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication again? A patient satisfaction survey in a UK population.

ABSTRACT: Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) effectively reduces objective gastro-oesophageal reflux. It can however cause side effects which affect quality of life or fail to improve subjective reflux symptoms. This study aims to assess patient satisfaction following LNF by assessing whether patients would have the procedure again.Telephone survey using a structured questionnaire. Participation was voluntary.UK Foundation Trust (two university hospitals).All patients who had LNF performed by a single surgeon between November 2008 and June 2012.Primarily, current reflux symptoms, antiacid medication requirement and whether participants would choose to have the procedure again (should they still have their initial symptoms). Further measures were conversion to open procedure, need for redo or reversal, and mortality.99 patients underwent LNF in the quoted period; 71 were contactable and willing to participate. Of the 99, two required redo operations (neither of whom was contactable), and one had a reversal (primary operation included). Median time since the operation was 33 months (range 5-48 months). Compared with preoperatively, 72% rated their current reflux-symptom severity as ≤2/10, 23% as 3-6/10 and 4% as 7-10/10. 75% were not taking any antiacid medication. 89% of patients said that they would have the procedure again.This study provides supporting evidence that LNF improves reflux symptoms and decreases medication use at intermediate-term follow-up. These results will aid counselling and reassurance of patients regarding the risks and benefits of LNF as the majority of postoperative patients were sufficiently satisfied to choose the operation again.

SUBMITTER: Courtney MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5369741 | biostudies-other | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate patient experiences of specific aspects of haemodialysis care across several countries.DesignCross-sectional survey using the Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for End-Stage Renal Disease (CHOICE) questionnaire.SettingHaemodialysis clinics within a single provider in Europe and South America.Participants2748 adults treated in haemodialysis.Primary and secondary outcomesThe primary outcome was patient satisfaction with overall care. Secondary outcomes included patient experiences of individual aspects of dialysis care.Results2145 (78.1%) adults responded to the questionnaire. Fewer than half (46.5% (95% CI 44.5% to 48.6%)) rated their overall care as excellent. Global perceptions of care were uninfluenced by most respondent characteristics except age and depressive symptoms; older respondents were less critical of their care (adjusted OR for excellent rating 1.44 (1.01 to 2.04)) and those with depressive symptoms were less satisfied (0.56 (0.44 to 0.71)). Aspects of care that respondents most frequently ranked as excellent were staff attention to dialysis vascular access (54% (52% to 56%)); caring of nurses (53% (51% to 55%)); staff responsiveness to pain or discomfort (51% (49% to 53%)); caring, helpfulness and sensitivity of dialysis staff (50% (48% to 52%)); and ease of reaching dialysis staff by telephone (48% (46% to 50%)). The aspects of care least frequently ranked as excellent were information provided when choosing a dialysis modality (23% (21% to 25%)), ease of seeing a social worker (28% (24% to 32%)), information provided about dialysis (34% (32% to 36%)), accuracy of information from nephrologist (eg, about prognosis or likelihood of a kidney transplant; 37% (35% to 39%)) and accuracy of nephrologists' instructions (39% (36% to 41%)).ConclusionsHaemodialysis patients are least satisfied with the complex aspects of care. Patients' expectations for accurate information, prognosis, the likelihood of kidney transplantation and their options when choosing dialysis treatment need to be considered when planning healthcare research and practices.

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the perceptions and experiences of people with specific immune-mediated inflammatory diseases during the process of switching from Humira to biosimilar adalimumab.DesignCross-sectional survey.SettingAn anonymised, self-administered, web-based survey.ParticipantsThe participants were drawn from members and non-members of either the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society, the National Axial Spondyloarthritis Society, Crohn's and Colitis UK, or Psoriasis Association. Birdshot Uveitis Society and Olivia's Vision also signposted to the survey links.ResultsA total of 899 people living with various immune mediated inflammatory diseases participated in this survey. Thirty-four per cent of respondents reported poor overall satisfaction with their biosimilar adalimumab after the switch, associated with complaints related to the switching process including lack of shared decision making, scarcity of information provided by or signposted to by the department instigating the switch as well as lack of training with the new injection device. Where training with the new device had been provided, there were significantly reduced reports of pain when injecting the new biosimilar (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.55), side effects (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.47) and difficulty in using the new injection device (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41). Self-reported side effects were reduced by (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.38) when written information was provided by healthcare professionals and by (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.42) with provision of verbal information. Difficulty in using the new injection device was also reduced by provision of satisfactory information such as written documents (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.63) or by verbal communication with healthcare professionals (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.73). Finally, provision of satisfactory written or verbal information was associated with a reduction in any negative perception regarding symptom control with the new biosimilar by (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.57) and by (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.84), respectively.ConclusionsPatient reported experiences of the process of switching from originator to biosimilar emphasise the importance of clear communication, training and information in order to optimise perception and maximise achievable outcomes with the new treatment.

Project description:ObjectivesPatient satisfaction is an important indicator of hospital healthcare quality. Little up-to-date information of patient satisfaction in China is available. This study attempts to gain a holistic understanding of patient satisfaction in China and identify the key antecedents of patient satisfaction.DesignA cross-sectional national survey was conducted in 2018.SettingHospitals in 27 provinces and 4 municipalities in 4 regions of China.ParticipantsA random sample of 15 699 patients who visited 1304 hospitals were surveyed, with around 500 from each of the 27 provinces and 4 municipalities.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems questionnaire was used to measure patients' overall satisfaction and willingness to recommend the hospital.ResultsWe found significant variation in overall patient satisfaction but little variation in hospital recommendation across the four broad regions. Moreover, we examined determinants of patient satisfaction and their likelihood to recommend the hospital. The overall satisfaction for inpatients and outpatients is commonly influenced by communication with doctors (inpatient: β=0.524, p<0.001; outpatient: β=0.541, p<0.001), hospital cleanness (inpatient: β=0.165, p<0.05; outpatient: β=0.144, p<0.001) and acceptable charges (inpatient: β=1.481, p<0.001; outpatient: β=1.045, p<0.001). Both inpatients and outpatients are more likely to recommend the hospital if there are communication with doctors (inpatient: OR=1.743, p<0.001; outpatient: OR=1.647, p<0.001), acceptable charges (inpatient: OR=2.660, p<0.001; outpatient: OR=2.433, p<0.001). Outpatient satisfaction and hospital recommendation are also influenced by time spent with doctors (satisfaction: β=0.301, p<0.001; recommend: OR=1.430, p<0.001) and waiting time (satisfaction: β=-0.318, p<0.001; recommend: OR=0.844, p<0.001).ConclusionsThere are regional differences of patient satisfaction in China. Patient satisfaction is influenced by a variety of hospital factors and province/municipality factors. The influencing factors of patient satisfaction may not motivate patients to recommend the hospital.

Dataset Information

Would you have laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication again? A patient satisfaction survey in a UK population.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets