Patient related outcome measures in pancreatobiliary endoscopy
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Patient related experience measures in pancreatobiliary endoscopy
IRAS ID
311787
Contact name
Manu Nayar
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 1 months, 1 days
Research summary
Increasing emphasis of patient experience as a marker of quality has emerged in recent years. In the United Kingdom, the Francis report1 documented that losing sight of patients at the centre of healthcare was fundamental to a failing National Health Service hospital. As a result, the NHS now routinely assesses patient experiences of care in a range of clinical settings. Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) have achieved greater prominence in both clinical practice and research in recent years, due to the realization that patients' views are not optional, but essential for achieving high-quality care.
Within the field of endoscopy, patient experience has been associated with better patient outcomes and is important to gauge the quality of endoscopic practice, maximize participation in screening programs, and maintain repeat attendance for disease surveillance. However, to date, most tools to assess patient experience have focused on pain/discomfort and are clinician derived and measured.A literature review on patients’ experiences and reported outcomes of gastro intestinal endoscopy found that assessment of patient experience involves the measurement of specific constructs such as ‘anxiety’, ‘satisfaction’, ‘comfort’ and ‘pain’ before, during and after endoscopy procedures using a variety of clinician derived standardised measures until recently, studies measuring patient experience did not question the importance of these from the patients’ perspective.
The Newcastle ENDOPREMTM has developed the first patient-derived, patient-reported experience measures which has been tested and validated in the UK for colonoscopy, CT colonography and upper GI endoscopy. However, it is important to study whether this tool is valid when applied to different endoscopic procedures specially ERCP and EUS as there is limited evidence of patient experiences during these procedures.1.Francis R. The Francis Report (Report of the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust public inquiry) and the Government’s response [Internet]. 2013. Available from: https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06690
REC name
South West - Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
23/SW/0087
Date of REC Opinion
24 Jul 2023
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion