Patients' short-term knowledge of personal polyp history inadequate despite systematic notification of results after polypectomy.
Patients' short-term knowledge of personal polyp history inadequate despite systematic notification of results after polypectomy.
复制标题
尽管息肉切除术后系统地通知了结果，但患者对个人息肉病史的短期了解不足。
DOI：
10.1097/smj.0b013e31828de5f6
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
1.1
通讯作者：
Hoffman,BrendaJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Brock,AndrewS;Wallace,Kristin;Romagnuolo,Joseph;Hoffman,BrendaJ
目的：与病历相比，患者对个人息肉特征的记忆不足。一个准确的息肉的历史是必要的，以坚持指导方针。我们试图确定是否系统地告知患者的结肠镜检查和病理结果，在多方面的方式可以增加他们的知识，他们的个人polyphistory.MethodsWe进行了一项前瞻性的试点研究，240例患者进行筛选结肠镜检查息肉切除术由一个单一的内镜（BJH）在三级保健中心。所有患者在手术后立即提供了结果的口头报告，详细说明息肉大小和数量的内窥镜检查报告，以及详细说明其息肉病理结果的邮寄信件。尝试电话联系所有患者。患者被要求回忆他们的息肉的大小，数量和组织学。ResultsOne hundred（42%）的患者完成了电话调查。40名患者记住了息肉编号，5名患者记住了息肉组织学，1名患者记住了息肉大小。没有一个患者回忆起所有三个因素，尽管回忆起告诉家人结肠镜检查结果的患者更有可能回忆起至少一个息肉描述符（相对风险2.62 [95%置信区间1.01-6.83]）。没有其他变量与息肉recall.ConclusionsPatients的个人息肉特征的知识，即使系统通知后，似乎并不足以确定最佳的基于指南的结肠镜监测间隔。与家人讨论结果可能会有所帮助。
ObjectivesPatients' memories of personal polyp characteristics have been shown to be inadequate when compared with the medical record. An accurate polyp history is necessary to adhere to guidelines. We sought to determine whether systematically informing patients of the results of their colonoscopy and pathology in a multifaceted manner could increase their knowledge of their personal polyp history.MethodsWe conducted a prospective pilot study of 240 consecutive patients undergoing screening colonoscopy with polypectomy by a single endoscopist (BJH) at a tertiary care center. All of the patients were provided with a verbal report of findings immediately after the procedure, an endoscopy report specifying polyp size and number, and a mailed letter specifying the pathology results of their polyps. Telephone contact was attempted for all of the patients. Patients were asked to recall the size, number, and histology of their polyps.ResultsOne hundred (42%) of the patients completed the telephone survey. Forty patients remembered the polyp number; five remembered their polyp histology, and one recalled the polyp size. None of the patients recalled all three factors, although patients who recalled telling a family member the results of the colonoscopy were more likely to recall at least one polyp descriptor (relative risk 2.62 [95% confidence interval 1.01-6.83]). No other variables were associated with polyp recall.ConclusionsPatients' knowledge of personal polyp characteristics, even after systematic notification, does not seem adequate for determining the best guideline-based colonoscopy surveillance interval. Discussing results with family members may help.