Using Information Videos to Improve Patient Satisfaction in Endoscopy: A Prospective Service Improvement Project

Abstract

Background: Endoscopy is a rapidly developing discipline with new techniques and procedures being introduced each year. The consenting process is central to patient perception; using information videos as additional tools to aid consent and improve the quality of care in endoscopy is not well established. Our aim was to develop, implement and validate the use of patient educational videos to improve patients' satisfaction and experience in endoscopy.

Methods and analysis: This was a prospective service quality improvement study. Eligible patients were invited to watch the educational videos in addition to standard practice. We compared this group with a matched cohort of patients who were receiving standard care of postal information leaflets. Patient satisfaction was measured through the validated Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ).

Results: Patients in the intervention group scored four questions relating to pre-procedural information significantly higher than the control (p=0.038). The total mean GESQ score was also higher in the intervention group compared to the control, however this was not statistically significant (p=0.397). The intervention group had significantly lower cancellation rate (4%) compared to the control group (20%), p=0.023.

Conclusions: Patients who watched educational videos were more satisfied with pre-procedural information in the consenting period than those who did not. Further research is still needed to determine if they reduce patient anxiety. Meanwhile, it would be appropriate to implement these videos into routine practice as a cost-effective method of improving patient satisfaction.

Keywords: endoscopy intervention; gastroenterology and endoscopy; patient consent; patient counseling; video feedback.

Figure 1. Flowchart showing the recruitment process

177 patients were initially contacted. Out of the 95 eligible patients, 50 were allocated to Group A (intervention group shown the videos) and 45 to Group B (control group). After having the procedure 32 patients from each group completed the online survey. Patients were lost at the initial recruitment (n=82), refusing to watch videos (n=1) and cancelled procedures (n=11).

Figure 2. Pie Chart showing responses of Intervention group. (B) Pie Chart showing responses of Non-Intervention group. Response choices were “Very Easy”, “Easy”, “Fair”, “Difficult” and “Very Difficult”.

Figure 3. Pie Chart showing responses of Video Group. (B) Pie Chart showing responses of Non-Video Group. Response choices were “Very Useful”, “Useful”, “Fair”, “Not Very Useful” and “Not at all Useful”.

Figure 4. Pie Chart showing responses of Video Group. (B) Pie Chart showing responses of Non-Video Group. Response choices were “Very Easy”, “Easy”, “Fair”, “Difficult” and “Very Difficult”.

Figure 5. Pie Chart showing responses of Video Group. (B) Pie Chart showing responses of Non-Video Group. Response choices were “Very Useful”, “Useful”, “Fair”, “Not Very Useful” and “Not at all Useful”.