Assessing patient satisfaction with a microsuction service in general practice: a comparative study.
cerumen
delivery of health care
general practice
integrated
otitis externa
otolaryngology
patient satisfaction
Journal
BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
03
02
2019
accepted:
11
03
2019
entrez:
2
8
2019
pubmed:
2
8
2019
medline:
2
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the UK, about 2.3 million people each year require intervention for wax impaction, while otitis externa accounts for just over 1% of general practice consultations. Aural microsuction of debris from the ear canal is a commonly performed procedure within the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) outpatient clinic. This article examines the patient acceptability of an aural microsuction service delivered in general practice. To determine patient satisfaction following the introduction of a new microsuction service in general practice compared with a hospital-delivered service. This is a prospective comparative study in two rural general practices in Ireland and the emergency department (ED) of the Royal Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital (RVEEH), Dublin. A 3-month period of data collection on usual care of 56 patients in general practice was followed by a 3-month period of GP-intervention data collection on 67 patients. Comparative data were collected on 37 patients who attended the RVEEH for the same intervention procedure. Patients completed a validated patient satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ-18). Both general practice groups scored significantly higher in all seven aspects of medical care than the RVEEH cohort. Patients in the GP-intervention group scored significantly higher in terms of satisfaction with procedure technique compared with the usual care GP group. The provision of microsuction as a service in general practice confers as much or more patient satisfaction as the provision of the service in a hospital setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In the UK, about 2.3 million people each year require intervention for wax impaction, while otitis externa accounts for just over 1% of general practice consultations. Aural microsuction of debris from the ear canal is a commonly performed procedure within the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) outpatient clinic. This article examines the patient acceptability of an aural microsuction service delivered in general practice.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To determine patient satisfaction following the introduction of a new microsuction service in general practice compared with a hospital-delivered service.
DESIGN & SETTING
METHODS
This is a prospective comparative study in two rural general practices in Ireland and the emergency department (ED) of the Royal Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital (RVEEH), Dublin.
METHOD
METHODS
A 3-month period of data collection on usual care of 56 patients in general practice was followed by a 3-month period of GP-intervention data collection on 67 patients. Comparative data were collected on 37 patients who attended the RVEEH for the same intervention procedure. Patients completed a validated patient satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ-18).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Both general practice groups scored significantly higher in all seven aspects of medical care than the RVEEH cohort. Patients in the GP-intervention group scored significantly higher in terms of satisfaction with procedure technique compared with the usual care GP group.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The provision of microsuction as a service in general practice confers as much or more patient satisfaction as the provision of the service in a hospital setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31366680
pii: bjgpopen19X101649
doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen19X101649
pmc: PMC6662878
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019, The Authors.
Références
Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Jul;51(468):533-8
pubmed: 11462312
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2005 Jun;69(6):857-60
pubmed: 15885342
BMJ. 2005 Dec 17;331(7530):1441-6
pubmed: 16332728
BMJ. 2005 Dec 17;331(7530):1444-9
pubmed: 16339217
Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Dec;55(521):912-7
pubmed: 16378559
Br J Gen Pract. 2008 Jul;58(552):478-83
pubmed: 18611313
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 Dec;267(12):1863-6
pubmed: 20607265
Med Educ Online. 2013 Jul 23;18:21747
pubmed: 23883565
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Jan;156(1):14-29
pubmed: 28045632
J Laryngol Otol. 1995 Feb;109(2):130-3
pubmed: 7706918