Patient satisfaction in treatment for cervical pathology

Hendriksen,M. T.J.; van Delft,K. W.M.; Bremer,G. L.H.; Mertens,H. J.M.M.

doi:10.3892/ol.2011.273

Patient satisfaction in treatment for cervical pathology

Authors:
- M. T.J. Hendriksen
- K. W.M. van Delft
- G. L.H. Bremer
- H. J.M.M. Mertens
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Gynecology Department, Orbis Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
Published online on: March 21, 2011 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2011.273
Pages: 439-443

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

This study aimed to analyse the satisfaction levels of patients treated for cervical dysplasia. At the Orbis Medical Center, all cases of abnormal cervical cytology are referred for colposcopy; however, there are three possible routings for patients: i) Patients are informed by the gynecologist about the colposcopy in a visit to the outpatient clinic, and colposcopy is planned in a second visit; ii) patients are informed by the gynecologist immediately before the colposcopy (a single visit); or iii) patients are called by a nurse practitioner 1-2 weeks prior to the colposcopy. The nurse practitioner informs patients about their Pap smear result, the colposcopy procedure and the follow-up (single visit plus telephone conversation). Patient satisfaction was analysed in the diagnostic and occasionally in the therapeutic colposcopies, with regards to information, treatment, appeasement and number of visits. The issue of whether the introduction of nurse practitioners improved patient satisfaction was also assessed. Patient satisfaction questionnaires were sent to all 593 patients who underwent a colposcopic examination for the first time following an abnormal smear test result. Data were analysed using SPSS 14.0. For statistical analyses, χ² tests and the Mann-Whitney U test were used. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. The response rates did not differ significantly among the three groups of patients. In general, patient satisfaction regarding care was high (96%). The role of the nurse practitioner was rated highly (8.0‑8.4). Although there were differences in the number of visits and satisfaction regarding the information provided, patient satisfaction did not differ significantly between groups 1 and 3. Patients in group 2 were significantly less satisfied with regard to almost all analysed data. In conclusion, the single visit procedure is extremely efficient. Patient satisfaction did not differ significantly between groups 1 and 3, but group 2 patients were significantly less satisfied. The introduction of nurse practitioners improves patients' knowledge, comfort and satisfaction. Furthermore, it reduces the number of visits required. Efficient treatment strategies were introduced and patient satisfaction was increased.

View Figures

View References

1	Schiffman MH, Bauer HM, Hoover RN, et al: Epidemiologic evidence showing that human papillomavirus infection causes most cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 85:958–964. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar
2	Van Ballegooijen M and Hermens R: Cervical cancer screening in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer. 36:2244–2246. 2000.
3	De Bruin A, De Koning HJ and van Ballegooijen M: Gezondheidsenquêtes. Cervixuitstrijkjes en mammografieën, Gezondheidsenquêtes 1991. Maandberichten Gezondheid (In Dutch). 5:4–20. 1993.
4	Marteau TM, Walker P, Giles J and Smail M: Anxieties in women undergoing colposcopy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 97:859–861. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Byrom J, Clarke T, Neale J, et al: Can pre-colposcopy sessions reduce anxiety at the time of colposcopy? A prospective randomised study. J Obstet Gynaecol. 22:415–420. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Wilkinson C, Jones JM and McBride J: Anxiety caused by abnormal result of cervical smear test: a controlled trial. BMJ. 300:4401990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Tahseen S and Reid PC: Psychological distress associated with colposcopy: patient’s perceptions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 139:90–94. 2008.
8	Chan YM, Lee PW, Ng TY and Ngan HY: Could precolposcopy information and counselling reduce women’s anxiety and improve knowledge and compliance to follow-up? Gynecol Oncol. 95:341–346. 2004.PubMed/NCBI
9	Kavanagh AM and Broom DH: Women’s understanding of abnormal smear test results: a quantitative interview study. BMJ. 314:1388–1391. 1997.
10	Galaal KA, Deane K, Sangal S and Lopes AD: Interventions for reducing anxiety in women undergoing colposcopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 3:CD0060132007.
11	Chan YM, Lee PW, Ng TY, Ngan HY and Wong LC: The use of music to reduce anxiety for patients undergoing colposcopy: a randomised trial. Gynecol Oncol. 91:213–217. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Howells RE, Dunn PD, Isasi T, et al: Is the provision of information leaflets before colposcopy beneficial? A prospective randomised study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 106:528–534. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Mahdavi A and Monk BJ: Vaccines against human papillomavirus and cervical cancer: promises and challenges. Oncologist. 10:528–538. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Kurman RJ, Henson DE, Herbst AL, et al: Interim guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology. JAMA. 271:1866–1869. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Insinga RP, Glass AG and Rush BB: Diagnoses and outcomes in cervical cancer screening: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynaecol. 191:105–113. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Breemhaar B, Visser AP and Kleijnen JG: Perceptions and behaviour among elderly hospital patients: description and explanation of age differences in satisfaction, knowledge, emotions and behaviour. Soc Sci Med. 31:1377–1385. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar
17	Hall JA and Dornan MC: Patient sociodemographic characteristics as predictors of satisfaction with medical care: a meta-analysis. Soc Sci Med. 30:811–818. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Sixma HJ, Kerssens JJ, van Campen C and Peters L: Quality of care from the patients’ perspective: from theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument. Health Expect. 1:82–95. 1998.
19	Xiao H and Barber JP: The effect of perceived health status on patient satisfaction. Value Health. 11:719–725. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Brouwer W and Delnoij DMJ: Verdiepingsstudie prestatie-indicatoren consumenttevredenheid en patiënttevredenheid. Nivel; Utrecht: 2004
21	Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK and Christakis NA: Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 50:1129–1136. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Hall JA, Roter DL and Katz NR: Meta-analysis of correlates of provider behavior in medical encounters. Med Care. 26:657–675. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Nathorst-Böös J, Munck IM, Eckerlund I and Ekfeldt-Sandberg C: An evaluation of the QSP and the QPP: two methods for measuring patient satisfaction. Int J Qual Health Care. 13:257–264. 2001.PubMed/NCBI
24	Kola S and Walsh JC: Patients’ psychological reactions to colposcopy and LLETZ treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 146:96–99. 2009.
25	Howells RE, Lockett J, Dunn PD, Foden Shroff J and Redman CW: Do women referred for colposcopy receive adequate information from the primary care team? J Obstet Gynaecol. 19:59–60. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Brooks SE, Gordon NJ, Keller SJ, et al: Association of knowledge, anxiety, and fear with adherence to follow-up for colposcopy. J Low Geni Tract Dis. 6:17–22. 2002.PubMed/NCBI
27	Williams B: Patient satisfaction: a valid concept? Soc Sci Med. 38:509–516. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Hargraves JL, Wilson IB, Zaslavsky A, et al: Adjusting for patient characteristics when analyzing reports from patients about hospital care. Med Care. 39:635–641. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Hendriks AA, Vrielink MR, Smets EM, van Es SQ and De Haes JC: Improving the assessment of (in)patients’ satisfaction with hospital care. Med Care. 39:270–283. 2001.
30	Sitzia J and Wood N: Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med. 45:1829–1843. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Barkley WM and Furse DH: Changing priorities for improvement: the impact of low response rates in patient satisfaction. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 22:427–433. 1996.PubMed/NCBI
32	Sitzia J and Wood N: Response rate in patient satisfaction research: an analysis of 210 published studies. Int J Health Care. 10:311–317. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Gath DH, Hallam N, Mynors-Wallis L, Day A and Bond SA: Emotional reactions in women attending a UK colposcopy clinic. J Epidemiol Health. 49:79–83. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI