A qualitative evaluation of information leaflets for gastroscopy procedure

Kader Parahoo, Tanya Ridley, Kathryn Thompson, Vidar Melby, George Humphreys

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Written information sent to patients prior to diagnostic gastroscopy is an important part of the process of informing and preparing them for the procedure. Yet there is ample evidence in the literature that information leaflets do not measure up to the required standard. In this study, information leaflets from a random sample of seven hospitals in Northern Ireland that carried out gastroscopy as a day procedure were evaluated using a checklist of items recommended by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) for inclusion in leaflets for patients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy. The results showed that the number of written materials sent to patients prior to the procedure varied between units. There were inconsistencies in the information given by the same unit, and overall, there was a lack of vital information in most of the leaflets. Some of the information was confusing and ambiguous. The potential risk of the procedure was explained in only one of the leaflets. Patients’ right to choose to have a mild sedative was not made clear in most of the leaflets. More should be done to address these gaps and inconsistencies in the written information provided to patients prior to gastroscopy.
LanguageEnglish
Pages423-431
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume9
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2003

Fingerprint

Gastroscopy
Northern Ireland
Patient Rights
Checklist
Hypnotics and Sedatives

Cite this

Parahoo, Kader ; Ridley, Tanya ; Thompson, Kathryn ; Melby, Vidar ; Humphreys, George. / A qualitative evaluation of information leaflets for gastroscopy procedure. In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2003 ; Vol. 9, No. 4. pp. 423-431.
@article{2b3c2e05a9b94ce1823915f6783ffed5,
title = "A qualitative evaluation of information leaflets for gastroscopy procedure",
abstract = "Written information sent to patients prior to diagnostic gastroscopy is an important part of the process of informing and preparing them for the procedure. Yet there is ample evidence in the literature that information leaflets do not measure up to the required standard. In this study, information leaflets from a random sample of seven hospitals in Northern Ireland that carried out gastroscopy as a day procedure were evaluated using a checklist of items recommended by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) for inclusion in leaflets for patients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy. The results showed that the number of written materials sent to patients prior to the procedure varied between units. There were inconsistencies in the information given by the same unit, and overall, there was a lack of vital information in most of the leaflets. Some of the information was confusing and ambiguous. The potential risk of the procedure was explained in only one of the leaflets. Patients’ right to choose to have a mild sedative was not made clear in most of the leaflets. More should be done to address these gaps and inconsistencies in the written information provided to patients prior to gastroscopy.",
author = "Kader Parahoo and Tanya Ridley and Kathryn Thompson and Vidar Melby and George Humphreys",
year = "2003",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1046/j.1365-2753.2003.00397.x",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "423--431",
journal = "Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice",
issn = "1356-1294",
number = "4",

}

A qualitative evaluation of information leaflets for gastroscopy procedure. / Parahoo, Kader; Ridley, Tanya; Thompson, Kathryn; Melby, Vidar; Humphreys, George.

In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 9, No. 4, 11.2003, p. 423-431.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A qualitative evaluation of information leaflets for gastroscopy procedure

AU - Parahoo, Kader

AU - Ridley, Tanya

AU - Thompson, Kathryn

AU - Melby, Vidar

AU - Humphreys, George

PY - 2003/11

Y1 - 2003/11

N2 - Written information sent to patients prior to diagnostic gastroscopy is an important part of the process of informing and preparing them for the procedure. Yet there is ample evidence in the literature that information leaflets do not measure up to the required standard. In this study, information leaflets from a random sample of seven hospitals in Northern Ireland that carried out gastroscopy as a day procedure were evaluated using a checklist of items recommended by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) for inclusion in leaflets for patients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy. The results showed that the number of written materials sent to patients prior to the procedure varied between units. There were inconsistencies in the information given by the same unit, and overall, there was a lack of vital information in most of the leaflets. Some of the information was confusing and ambiguous. The potential risk of the procedure was explained in only one of the leaflets. Patients’ right to choose to have a mild sedative was not made clear in most of the leaflets. More should be done to address these gaps and inconsistencies in the written information provided to patients prior to gastroscopy.

AB - Written information sent to patients prior to diagnostic gastroscopy is an important part of the process of informing and preparing them for the procedure. Yet there is ample evidence in the literature that information leaflets do not measure up to the required standard. In this study, information leaflets from a random sample of seven hospitals in Northern Ireland that carried out gastroscopy as a day procedure were evaluated using a checklist of items recommended by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) for inclusion in leaflets for patients undergoing diagnostic gastroscopy. The results showed that the number of written materials sent to patients prior to the procedure varied between units. There were inconsistencies in the information given by the same unit, and overall, there was a lack of vital information in most of the leaflets. Some of the information was confusing and ambiguous. The potential risk of the procedure was explained in only one of the leaflets. Patients’ right to choose to have a mild sedative was not made clear in most of the leaflets. More should be done to address these gaps and inconsistencies in the written information provided to patients prior to gastroscopy.

U2 - 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2003.00397.x

DO - 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2003.00397.x

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 423

EP - 431

JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

T2 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

SN - 1356-1294

IS - 4

ER -