10.5061/DRYAD.WDBRV15JB
McGoran, John
0000-0002-9514-5290
University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust
Bennett, Andrea
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
Cooper, Joanne
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
De Caestecker, John
University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust
Lovat, Laurence
University College London
Guha, Indra Neil
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
Ragunath, Krish
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
Sami, Sarmed
University College London
Acceptability to patients of screening disposable transnasal endoscopy:
qualitative interview analysis
Dryad
dataset
2019
2019-11-21T00:00:00Z
2019-11-21T00:00:00Z
en
17210 bytes
5
CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication
Objectives Screening in selected high risk populations for Barrett’s
oesophagus (BO) and oesophageal varices (OVs) has been proposed, but there
are obstacles with conventional oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (C-OGD),
including patient acceptability. Portable and disposable office-based
transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is a feasible and accurate alternative to C-OGD
that may have use in primary and secondary care. This article outlines a
qualitative analysis of patient experiences of TNE and C-OGD in order to
gain an insight into an acceptable delivery of an endoscopic screening
service. Design Purposeful sampling identified 23 participants who then
underwent semi-structured interviews to determine their experiences of
both procedures. Thematic analysis was conducted to derive meaning from
their lived experiences. Setting A secondary care endoscopy unit, clinic
room and interview room. Participants Patients referred for BO or OV
surveillance and for endoscopy to investigate dyspepsia underwent
unsedated TNE using the EG Scan II device followed by C-OGD with or
without sedation (patient choice), as part of a clinical trial. Results
The themes that arose from our analysis were: inclusivity in one’s own
health care; comfort level and convenience; validity of the procedure and
application to a screening population; and a sense of altruism and
reciprocity. Positive aspects of TNE included participant empowerment,
reduced discomfort and avoidance of conscious sedation. Participants felt
that if TNE screening was of proven efficacy it would be welcomed, though
views on use in a community setting were mixed. Conclusions Most patients
preferred TNE to unsedated C-OGD and the reasons they gave featured
strongly in the emerging themes. Preferences between TNE and sedated C-OGD
were more subtle, with equivalent comfort scores but merits and drawbacks
of both being discussed. This information identifies opportunities and
challenges in establishing an endoscopic screening service.